The law in Galatians

[Robert]

Gal 3:10 All who rely on the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law." 

11 Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The just by faith shall live."

12 The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, "The man who does these things will by them live." 

13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree."

 

 

Note the following: 

 

 

1] To rely on the law means to have confidence in your law performance for your entrance into paradise.  Paul typically uses the phrase "works of the law" to mean the same.

 

 

2] If one is rely on the "works of the law" then that individually must fulfill every law found in "the book of the law", i.e., the Pentateuch, the first, five books of the OT.

 

 

Now here's my central question:  What law condemns the sinner to the second death (i.e., the curse of the law)?

 

 

Let me give you Ellen White and then let's attempt to prove what she states given to context of Galatians chapter 3:

 

 

"The law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.” In this scripture, the Holy Spirit through the apostle is speaking especially of the moral law....The law is broken but cannot pardon the transgressor. It is our schoolmaster, condemning to punishment." [ http://text.egwwritings.org/publication.php?pubtype=Book&bookCode=6BC&pagenumber=1110 ]

 

 

“Complete obedience is the only condition that meets the requirement of the law. “God is not a man, that He should lie.” God’s law is the rule of His government. He says, “This do, and thou shalt live.” But to the disobedient He says, “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written in the book of the law to do them.” “The soul that sinneth, it shall die.” God has given the promise that those who obey His law will be rewarded, not only in the present life, but in the life to come. He declares just as decidedly that those who do not obey His requirements shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on them. By lips that never lie the obedient are blessed, and the disobedient are pronounced guilty. {Ellen White RH, May 7, 1901 par. 9}

 

 

 

 

Edited May 24, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

Now here's my central question:  What law condemns the sinner to the second death (i.e., the curse of the law)?

 

​Let's continue with the context:

Gal 3:16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say "and to seeds," meaning many people, but "and to your seed,"meaning one person, who is Christ. 

17 What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 

18 For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on a promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise. 

What law was introduced 430 years after God made His covenant of grace with Abraham?

God speaking to Abram: Gen 15:13 “Know for certain that for four hundred years your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own and that they will be enslaved and mistreated there.

 

 

Let's look at what happened after God freed Abraham's descendants:

 

 

Ex 12:40 Now the length of time the Israelite people lived in Egypt was 430 years. 41 At the end of the 430 years, to the very day, all the Lord’s divisions left Egypt.Ex 19:1 On the first day of the third month after the Israelites left Egypt—on that very day—they came to the Desert of Sinai.

 

 

What law was given at Sinai?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 24, 2015 by Robert

[pnattmbtc]

Have you read, "The Gospel in Galatians"?  This is a brilliant argument by Waggoner that the law in Galatians is the moral law.  This was at the heart of the controversy in 1888.  Waggoner wrote this in response to Butler's pamphlet "The Law in Galatians".  Even the names of the pamphlets are interesting.

Butler had been arguing that the law in Galatians was the ceremonial law.  This was in answer to the anti-nomian argument that "the law was our schoolmaster to lead us to Christ until the coming of the seed to whom the promise was made" (something like that; from memory).  Butler (and others taking this position with him, most notably Uriah Smith) argued this was talking about the ceremonial law, not the moral law, hence we are still under obligation to keep the moral law.  Waggoner argued that the law being spoken of by Paul was the moral law, agreeing with the anti-nomians, but had a way of meeting the argument that this would mean we are no longer under obligation to keep the moral law.

Ellen White wanted both sides to get together and study things out.  She was very upset when Butler published "The Law in Galatians", but felt the only fair thing would be that Waggoner should be able to present his view, and so it was that at the 1888 General Conference session the delegates were given a copy of "The Gospel in Galatians", and Waggoner presented his view, which Ellen White had not heard until then.  The rest, as they say, is history.  Ellen White responded that when she heard Waggoner speak, "every fiber of my heart said, "Amen!", referring the message presented by Waggoner and Jones as a "most precious message".

Fortunately we have access to this message, much of which is available free on line, including "The Gospel in Galatians", "Christ And His Righteousness", "The Glad Tidings" and "Waggoner on Romans".

[8thdaypriest]

You realize that when ANY Jew, or Hebrew Roots believer, or Messianic Jewish believer reads the word "law" - they understand it to mean Torah - the ENTIRE Torah, every command in the Books of Moses.  (There are over 300 of them, if you discount the ones that were given in both a "thus you shall do", and "this you shall not do" wording).   The Torah does not separate commands into "moral" vs "ceremonial".  For example: were the dietary laws moral, or ceremonial ? 

While it is acknowledged that the Ten Commands written on stone WERE "the Covenant", the other commands were regarded just as seriously, as things which God had commanded.  Therefore - to "love" their God, and serve Him, would be to obey ALL of His commands. 

Why would anyone say that the ceremonial laws, the law of sacrifices, or the Feasts do not "lead us to Christ" ?  Of course they do!  So they are also part of the "schoolmaster". 

I believe "the Law in Galatians" is the ENTIRE Law - Covenant as well as Ceremonial.  All "lead us to Christ" - just in different ways. 

In the earth made new, there will be no ARK.  It will not come to mind.  The Ten Commands will not be posted on a wall anywhere.  AND just as certain, there will be no animal sacrifices.  But the Feasts of the LORD will be celebrated.  The 7th Day rest, the New Moon, and the Feast of Tabernacles are specifically mentioned.  We won't commemorate those Feasts in the same WAY that was originally commanded, but we WILL go up to Jerusalem on those days, to worship our God. 

[pnattmbtc]

Robert quoted a statement from Ellen White regarding the Law in Galatians.  Here's another one:

I am asked concerning the law in Galatians. What law is the schoolmaster to bring us to Christ? I answer: Both the ceremonial and the moral code of ten commandments. (1SM 233)

She's not contradicting herself, because in the other quote she speaks of the law here as being "primarily" the moral law, with the idea that there is a secondary way in which it can be understood to not be only the moral law, which I think is very well explained in your post (8th day, the post right before this one), and actually somewhat similar to what EGW wrote in 1SM 233, if you read what follows.

I think Waggoner's logic in "The Glad Tidings" is solid, and well articulated.  Also the pamphlet "The Gospel in Galatians" discusses the law in Galatians.  Both can be found on line (to read for free). 

[8thdaypriest]

The Law of the Tabernacle with the Feasts of the LORD, teaches us what Christ has and will do FOR US.  The Covenant of Ten teaches us what Christ will do IN US.   Both are essential. 

I have copies of Waggoner's two books. 

[Ron Amnsn]

The meaning of "the law" in Galatians depends on the context.  The context of Galatians is primarily Jewish -- specifically as it relates to Gentile believers and what place they have in that Jewish context.  In a Jewish context, like 8thdaypriest says, the Law is never divided into non-biblical categories called "ceremonial" and "moral".  The word "law", when referring to God's word, includes all of Torah -- the first five books of the Old Testament. But "the law" can also include the man-made traditional laws added by the Jewish sages to "guard" the Torah.  If those man-made traditional laws were being imposed on the Gentile believers in Galatia in a manner that disagreed with Scripture, then Paul would address that in his letter to the Galatians.

The original readers of Galatians easily understood Paul because they knew first-hand what arguments were being used in the controversy at the synagogue in Galatia.  Those of us who came along later, read what Paul wrote and assume he was saying other things.  If it is our desire that Paul overthrow the Word of God in the Old Testament, then we assume that is what Paul meant to do in the book of Galatians -- even though elsewhere Paul testifies that he believes everything that agrees with the Law and the Prophets.

Does the primary message of Galatians agree with, or disagree with the existing Scriptures of Paul's day?  In other words, when Paul preached the message contained in the book of Galatians to the people at the Jewish synagogue at Berea (Acts 17) could they confirm, by daily searching the Old Testament scriptures, that Paul's "Galatians message" was true?  Yes.  I believe that Paul's message in Galatians is in total agreement with the Old Testament and with the life of Jesus.  If not, that is if Paul's message in Galatians disagrees with other parts of the Scriptures existing in Paul's day, then we should not accept the book of Galatians as Scripture.

 

[joeb]

The "law" in Jesus' time and Paul's time also included the Oral law which was what the Jews had added to the Torah, and in fact they taught that it was greater than God's word. 

[pnattmbtc]

Ron Amnsn:In a Jewish context, like 8thdaypriest says, the Law is never divided into non-biblical categories called "ceremonial" and "moral".

The Jews were certainly aware of differences between the ceremonial and moral law.  There are a couple of ways of seeing this.  One is that the "moral law" was written by God's own finger.  A second point is the law was to be written in the heart and mind, a concept which makes sense in regards to morality.

When Jesus was asked which was the greatest commandment, this was understood as a reference to the "moral law".

When the rich young rule spoke to Jesus, and Jesus said if he would enter into life he should keep the commandments, and he asked "which ones," Jesus cited commandments from the "moral law".

When James spoke of the law, he quoted several commandments from the "moral law".

There are many examples like this.  The terminology isn't imporatant (whether we call it "moral law" or "ceremonial law"), but the concept.  The concept is certainly Biblical, which is the impotant thing.

E. J. Waggoner wrote a pamphlet called, "The Gospel in Galatians", dealing with the issue of how "law" is used in Galatians, a pamphlet relying entirely upon Scripture, which logic I found compelling.  It's available to read online for free.

[LifeHiscost]

For what it's worth:

All of the ceremonial laws point forward to the Lamb of God (Jesus) which takes away the sin of the world. When Jesus came the first time, the ceremonies no longer had anything for which to point forward.

29The next day he saw Jesus coming to him and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! 30"This is He on behalf of whom I said, 'After me comes a Man who has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.'…John1

   

Three Old Testament Types/Antitypes of the blood of Christ

The antitype is the real thing. The type is an image of the antitype. The hammer on an old typewriter, was the antitype. When this hammer hit the paper through the ink ribbon, it left an image of the antitype. This image is called the "type". When you pulled out the paper, the letters were mere type images of the original antitype.

For example, the incense of the Old Testament tabernacle in the Holy Place was an type of the prayers (the antitype) of the saints. Revelation 5:8. The symbol was the physical incense, the real meaning was literal prayer.

Jesus is liken in the Old Testament to many types. We are most familiar with Jesus being likened unto a lamb. This type comes from Exodus 12. The Passover lamb is actually the type of Jesus as the lamb of God. The first Passover feast eaten by the Jews in Egypt was to become a memorial feast for the people. The Lord's Supper (communion) is the New Testament corresponding type to Christ. Both the Passover feast and the Lord's supper have many things in common. They had the same meaning: (A memorial: Passover was to remember Egypt, while the Lord's Supper, to remember Christ's death Ex 12:26/1 Cor 11:25) Each feast used a young, innocent and perfect lamb: (Ex 12:5/ John 1:29; 1 Pe 1:19) The Jews were to eat the flesh of the Passover lamb Ex 12:8, while Christians are to eat the flesh (bread) of Christ (1 Cor 11:27). The Jews were not allowed to break any bones of the lamb when they ate it: Ex 12:46 + Num 9:12. In the same manner the Christian's "Passover lamb" had no bone broken as prophesied in Ps 34:20 and fulfilled in Jn 19:33-36. The blood of the Jewish Passover lamb was to be painted on the outside of the door so that when the death angel came to destroy all of Egypt, he would "Passover" that house and not kill the occupants. (Thus the reason why it is called the "Passover" feast.) The blood of the Christian's Passover lamb is for the forgiveness of sins, so that when Judgment day comes, we will not be destroyed in Hell. Matthew 26:27.

In Leviticus 16:29-34 we have another type of Christ called the "goat of atonement" and the "scape-goat" The priest took two goats. The first was killed and sacrificed for the sins of the people just like Jesus was on the cross. But the imagery is gets even more interesting. In the New Testament, Hebrews 9:11 goes on to say, "But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption."

The second goat of Lev 16, was the "scape-goat". When someone says, "I am just a scape-goat", we understand that this person is being unfairly blamed for some wrong another has committed. Again, Jesus fits the imagery. The Jewish priest placed his hands on this second goat which symbolized a transfer of all the sins of the people to the goat. Then the goat was taken out to the deep wilderness and released. In the same way Jesus suffered unfairly on the cross for sins He did not commit. He was innocent and sinless yet suffered as if He had sinned. Jesus is our scape-goat! Just as the scape-goat was driven into the wilderness. Jesus was crucified outside the gate of the city of Jerusalem.

The blood of Jesus therefore is a central theme for the redemption of all mankind. Eph 1:7. The blood of Christ justifies: Rom 5:9. It sanctifies: Heb 13:12; cleanses: 1 n 1:7; Washes: Rev 1:5; Brings us near to God: Col 1:20; The church was bought with the Blood of Christ: Acts 20:28; Rev 5:9. Now the grace of God sent His son to die for our sins on the cross. Eph 2:8, "By grace you are saved, through faith..." In the redemption process, God supplies the grace and man supplies the faith. Without the blood of Christ mankind would utterly we without hope. Have you applied the sacrificial blood of Christ to your sins?

That in red is not in agreement with the Word which is why I'm not providing the URL for this information. The Truth is written below from the Word.

…7so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.…Ephesians 2

God is Love!  Jesus saves! 

[Ron Amnsn]

The Jews were certainly aware of differences between the ceremonial and moral law. 

There's a huge difference between what the Jews in your examples were doing and what is done by Christians who distinguish between "moral law" and "ceremonial law". 

The Jews recognize that the Ten Words of the Covenant document are the foundation of all the other instructions of God. The Jews see the Ten Words as a kind of "table of contents" to the rest of the instructions God gave through Moses.  For example, the fourth commandment tells us to work six days and rest on the seventh, and the rest of the Law tells us how to do our work in a godly manner and how to rest.  The Jews in the examples you gave were wanting to follow all of God's instructions, which in a few situations seem to be in conflict.  An example of such a conflict is the law to rest on Sabbath which seems to conflict with the law to care for a lost animal until its owner comes to claim it when the lost animal is in need of rescuing on Sabbath.  The Jews in your examples were wanting clarification about which laws were greater and should take precedence so they could do the right thing. Such Jews believe what is actually taught in Scripture about God's Law of Moses being a blessing.  Those Jews were upholding the Law, as the apostle Paul did. The answers Jesus gave also upheld God's Law of Moses.  In Scripture, wanting to follow the Law is a result of loving God with one's whole heart.

On the other hand, most Christians distinguish between "moral law" and "ceremonial law" so they can decide which parts of God's Law of Moses are "safe" to ignore.  This is a pernicious form of legalism.  Such people don't want to follow all of God's good instructions.  They want a mechanism that will absolve them from observing the instructions of God.  They often feel that the non-"moral" laws of the Law of Moses are a detriment or curse that people are better off without.  They want to set aside large portions of the Law while retaining the Ten Words, which can be re-defined to suit themselves once they have discarded the rest of God's instructions that go along with the Ten Words.  They want to claim the righteousness of Jesus as their own, while disdaining much of the Law that defines that righteousness which Jesus actually lived and provides.  Jesus was proclaiming the Kingdom of God, a kingdom where God's Law would be lived by everyone as God intended it to be lived -- the Way that Jesus himself lived it.

 

[8thdaypriest]

LifeHiscost wrote: 

That in red [man supplies the faith] is not in agreement with the Word which is why I'm not providing the URL for this information. The Truth is written below from the Word.

…7so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.…Ephesians 2

This is how I understand it.  God has supplied us with protection and blessing, and evidence.  Man RESPONDS to what God has provided with either "faith" or "hardening".  

God created mankind with the ability to respond.  It's called the "will".   HE protects us from Satan's overpowering control, while we process the evidence and CHOOSE how we will respond.  That is HOW we have "free" will.    I do NOT believe that our God DECIDES for us, or RESPONDS for us.  That is our responsibility. 

KJV  Joshua 24:15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.

[8thdaypriest]

This question is for Ron. 

Does EVERY requirement for mankind remain the SAME as during the age from Solomon to the Cross, with the addition of the requirement for "belief" in Jesus as Son of God, as Messiah, as King, and as LORD ?

What - if anything - CHANGED with the death of Jesus the Christ? 

[8thdaypriest]

LifeHiscost wrote:

All of the ceremonial laws point forward to the Lamb of God (Jesus) which takes away the sin of the world. When Jesus came the first time, the ceremonies no longer had anything for which to point forward.

Rachel responds:

I do believe that the system of animal sacrifice was rendered "obsolete" when the "one true sacrifice" was offered.  

Here is a link to the study on that topic at my website:   http://prophecyviewpoint.com/htdocs/39-The End of Sacrifices.pdf

Having said that, there are "ceremonies" in which we, as believers, still participate.  A wedding is a "ceremony" - is it not?  And marriage was commanded by the LORD.  We have dedication "ceremonies" wherein the parents of infants dedicate themselves publicly to raise their child "in the LORD".   We are baptized.  We participate in public congregational prayer, and singing to God.  We partake of the "bread" and the "wine" which represent our LORD's body and blood.  [Some of us do that quarterly, and others - like me - do it once a year, at Passover.] 

And some of the "ceremonial" Feasts, have YET to be fulfilled.  The FALL FEASTS.  So those Feasts DO still "point forward". 

[Ron Amnsn]

Does EVERY requirement for mankind remain the SAME as during the age from Solomon to the Cross, with the addition of the requirement for "belief" in Jesus as Son of God, as Messiah, as King, and as LORD ?

In the Scriptures we read about a holy God who is dependable and whose word and covenants are sure.  I don't see anywhere in Scripture where God has asked his covenant people to quit being obedient, or to quit being holy.  Have the things that God's word tells us were pleasing to God before, somehow become displeasing to him now?  I don't see anywhere in Scripture that Jesus told his disciples to forget about what he taught them before he died, or to follow a different model than the one he gave them to follow before he died.

[Ron Amnsn]

What - if anything - CHANGED with the death of Jesus the Christ? 

​The life, death, and resurrection of the Messiah have shown us that we serve a God who has a plan and fulfills it on time, is righteous yet merciful, keeps his promises, keeps his word, and loves and redeems sinners yet has high expectations for them. Were you expecting any of that to change?

Before, the Messiah and his work of redemption were a future promise revealed in part by prophecies, the object lessons of the sanctuary, the testimony of the prophets, and by the annual cycle of God's feasts.  But now the the Messiah is known, the meaning of many of God's object lessons have been made known and are understood so they can be explained more fully to those who participate, and many of the promises recorded by the prophets have been fulfilled and are understood.  A major step of the plan of redemption has been successfully accomplished.  The disciples of Jesus have been commissioned to take this good news to all nations and to make disciples of all nations, and the Holy Spirit has been given to accomplish that commission.

When I read the Scriptures I see continuity in the workings of God, rather than change.

[8thdaypriest]

In the Scriptures we read about a holy God who is dependable and whose word and covenants are sure.  I don't see anywhere in Scripture where God has asked his covenant people to quit being obedient, or to quit being holy.  Have the things that God's word tells us were pleasing to God before, somehow become displeasing to him now?  I don't see anywhere in Scripture that Jesus told his disciples to forget about what he taught them before he died, or to follow a different model than the one he gave them to follow before he died.

​In other words - NOTHING CHANGED.

[LifeHiscost]

 

Here is a link to the study on that topic at my website:   http://prophecyviewpoint.com/htdocs/39-The End of Sacrifices.pdf

 

And some of the "ceremonial" Feasts, have YET to be fulfilled.  The FALL FEASTS.  So those Feasts DO still "point forward". 

​I've downloaded that PDF but haven't had time enough to read it fully yet. Perhaps you have a short answer that reveals what the feasts look forward too that would include the Divine instruction from the Word for keeping them without interruption.

God is Love!  Jesus saves! 

 

[8thdaypriest]

At the time Paul wrote to the Galatians, only the Spring Feasts (Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread, First Fruits, and Pentecost) had BEEN FULFILLED. 

Feast of Trumpets, Day of Atonement, and Feast of Tabernacles HAD NOT YET BEEN FULFILLED.  So those Feasts pointed forward to events in the future - to things that Jesus Christ would do. 

Passover - portrayed and prophesied Messiah's sacrificial death.  It was ALSO the day of deliverance from Egypt, and points forward to our deliverance from Satan's kingdom, and to the Passover that WE will eat with Christ in His Father's kingdom. 

Feast of Unleavened Bread - 7 days - reminded them of the deliverance from Egypt, and reminds us of our deliverance from evil.  (This Feast ALSO looks forward to our deliverance at the SC, while plagues are poured out.)  

Feast of Firstfruits - prophesied of Jesus Christ - the firstfruits of a great harvest to come.  (I believe it ALSO points forward to the deliverance of the 144,000 - also called "firstfruits" at the SC)

Pentecost - reminded them of the day the Law was spoken from Mt Sinai, and prophesied of the Law to be written in the heart by the Spirit.  The first experience of THAT was at the first Pentecost following the resurrection of Jesus. 

Feast of Trumpets - 1st day of 7th month:  beginning of the final warning for those who live on earth - first of the 7 final trumpet judgments.

Day of Atonement - Yom Kippur - I believe will be fulfilled at the SC.  Our High Priest will come before the judgment scene of Daniel 7, to receive the kingdom.  He will THEN immediately come out from the Tabernacle, to bless and to receive His waiting people, and to banish the scapegoat (Satan) to "the uninhabited place".  It will be the day when we truly, literally are AT ONE with Him.   

These Scriptures point FORWARD beyond this present age: 

The Feast of Unleavened Bread:  Luke 22:15 Then He said to them, "With fervent desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; 16 "for I say to you, I will no longer eat of it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God."   Matthew 26:29 "But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine [the Passover cup of redemption] from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom." (NKJ)  The CONTEXT for these statements was "the last supper" - which was a Passover Seder.    We will commemorate the Passover, in the Kingdom - from year to year,  not with a dead lamb - but with a risen Savior. 

Isaiah 66:23 And it shall come to pass That from one New Moon to another, And from one Sabbath to another, All flesh shall come to worship before Me," says the LORD. (NKJ)

The Rest of the 7th day, was only one of "the LORD's appointed times".  New Moon,  First and 7th day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread,  Pentecost,  Feast of Trumpets,   First and Last Day of Feast of Tabernacles,  AND "The Feast of the 8th Day" - WERE ALSO APPOINTED SABBATHS (days upon which no ordinary work was to be done). 

When Isaiah prophesied that all flesh would come up to worship before the LORD, from one Sabbath to another - this prophesy INCLUDES all of the appointed times - NOT JUST the 7th day rest. 

Zechariah 14:16  And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the Feast of Tabernacles. 17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain. 18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. 19 This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. (KJV)

THIS prophecy looks forward to a time AFTER the LORD has delivered Jerusalem, from "the nations" which sought to destroy her.   It is a time when everything in Jerusalem is holy.  There will no longer be a Canaanite in the House of the LORD.   YET - "the families of the earth" - "the nations" are invited to come to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles. 

NOW - we can either call this another "might have been" prophecy, OR we can try to place this prophecy in time, in a context that might make sense.  Some (not SDAs) say that many will survive the 7 wrath plagues, and these will be invited to come up to Jerusalem, to learn the ways of the LORD during the 7th millennium.  I don't agree with that interpretation.  I place this prophecy during the 8th millennium, and I believe that these people will be "the rest of the dead".  Some WILL come to learn the ways of the Lord.  Some WILL NOT.  The title "family of Egypt" is a reference to "the mixed multitude" (not of Israel, yet came out of Egypt).  There was a "mixed multitude" who followed Moses into the wilderness.  And there was a "mixed multitude" who followed Ezra out of Babylon.  Why not a "mixed multitude" during the 8th millennium??  They're called "the rest of the dead". 

[8thdaypriest]

Ron and I debated for some time, concerning whether the system of animal sacrifice performed under the Aaronic priesthood, was rendered obsolete by the death of Messiah.  I believe the offering of animal blood, and animal flesh is NO LONGER needed, required, or wanted by our God.  

I believe we will go up to worship the LORD at the "appointed times" in the coming Kingdom of God on earth.  But I DO NOT believe we will celebrate these feasts with the blood or flesh, of bulls and goats (which NEVER took away sin anyway). 

Isaiah 11:9 "They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain, For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea."

Isaiah 65:25 "'The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, The lion shall eat straw like the ox, And dust shall be the serpent's food. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain,' says the LORD." 

Both priest and people were COMMANDED to eat the MEAT of the Passover Lamb, and the MEAT of the Peace offering.  Priests were commanded to EAT the MEAT of the "sin offering".  If all the animals which formerly ate meat, will - in the kingdom - be vegetarian, WHY WOULD WE THINK that men would still be eating the meat of sacrifices????? 

Today - we partake of Messiah, in the emblems of His body and His blood.  

[joeb]

The Jews were certainly aware of differences between the ceremonial and moral law.  There are a couple of ways of seeing this.  One is that the "moral law" was written by God's own finger.  A second point is the law was to be written in the heart and mind, a concept which makes sense in regards to morality.

When Jesus was asked which was the greatest commandment, this was understood as a reference to the "moral law".

When the rich young rule spoke to Jesus, and Jesus said if he would enter into life he should keep the commandments, and he asked "which ones," Jesus cited commandments from the "moral law".

When James spoke of the law, he quoted several commandments from the "moral law".

There are many examples like this.  The terminology isn't imporatant (whether we call it "moral law" or "ceremonial law"), but the concept.  The concept is certainly Biblical, which is the impotant thing.

E. J. Waggoner wrote a pamphlet called, "The Gospel in Galatians", dealing with the issue of how "law" is used in Galatians, a pamphlet relying entirely upon Scripture, which logic I found compelling.  It's available to read online for free.

​The Jews held their oral law above the law of God.  Their oral traditions were what they (Saducees and Pharisees) claimed to lived by and used to keep the ordinary men under their control.  You need to study this out.  Their oral law told the people that they must accept anything their rabbis taught them even if one rabbi taught exactly the opposite of what another rabbi taught.  The average person had to profess to believe rabbis that taught things that were polar opposites.  Neither one could be wrong, and to take sides with one and disagree with the other meant excommunication.

Edited June 15, 2015 by joeb

[pnattmbtc]

​The Jews held their oral law above the law of God.  Their oral traditions were what they (Saducees and Pharisees) claimed to lived by and used to keep the ordinary men under their control.  You need to study this out.  Their oral law told the people that they must accept anything their rabbis taught them even if one rabbi taught exactly the opposite of what another rabbi taught.  The average person had to profess to believe rabbis that taught things that were polar opposites.  Neither one could be wrong, and to take sides with one and disagree with the other meant excommunication.

​I'm not following what your response has to do with what I wrote.

[8thdaypriest]

I have listened to many of the Messianic, and Hebrew Roots Movement teachers over the years.  They teach that Paul wrote concerning the Oral Law - the traditions of the Pharisees, in the Letter to the Galatians.  Most HR and Messianic Jewish teachers do NOT BELIEVE that God set aside or declared "obsolete" ANY PART of ANY COMMAND that He gave concerning Israel (whether "moral" or "ceremonial").     They believe that Messiah will reign from a restored Temple on Mt Zion.  They believe that "all flesh" will go up to that Temple to offer animal sacrifices during the coming millennium. 

I do NOT BELIEVE share their beliefs concerning the 7th millennium reign of Messiah on the earth, or the belief concerning the restoration of animal sacrifice.  I believe their teaching is setting a TRAP.  The Evil One is about to pull off his greatest deception.  He will "sit in the Temple of God, showing himself, that he is God".  Believing the teachings of the HR Movement, is preparing many to worship the Evil One, thinking that he is Christ come.  

The Hebrew Roots Movement is growing rapidly.  They keep the 7th Day Rest.  They honor all of the "moral" commandments.  Their arguments are convincing.

The FACT that Jews (still today) place the "Oral Torah" above any part of the "Written Torah" - is the argument they use to convince believers that "the Law in Galatians" refers to "the Oral Traditions" NOT to the laws concerning circumcision, the sacrifices and the Aaronic priesthood - Laws given by God for Israel.

Here are the comments under "Oral Torah" at Wikipedia.org

According to Rabbinic Judaism, the "Oral Torah" or "Oral Law" (Hebrew: תורה שבעל פה, Torah she-be-`al peh, lit "Torah that is spoken") represents those laws, statutes, and legal interpretations that were not recorded in the Five Books of Moses, the "Written Torah" (Hebrew: תורה שבכתב, Torah she-bi-khtav, lit. "Torah that is written"), but nonetheless are regarded by Jews as prescriptive and co-given. This holistic Jewish code of conduct encompass a wide swath of ritual, worship, God-man and interpersonal relationships, from dietary laws to Sabbath and festival observance to marital relations, agricultural practices, and civil claims and damages.

According to Jewish tradition, the Oral Torah was passed down orally in an unbroken chain from generation to generation until its contents were finally committed to writing following the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, when Jewish civilization was faced with an existential threat.^[1]

The major repositories of the Oral Torah are the Mishnah, compiled between 200–220 CE by Rabbi Yehudah haNasi, and the Gemara, a series of running commentaries and debates concerning the Mishnah, which together are the Talmud, the preeminent text of Rabbinic Judaism. In fact, two "versions" of the Talmud exist: one produced in Jerusalem c. 300-350 CE (the Jerusalem Talmud), and second, more extensive Talmud compiled in Babylonia and published c. 450-500 CE (the Babylonian Talmud).

Belief that the Oral Torah was transmitted orally from God to Moses on Mount Sinai during the Exodus from Egypt is a fundamental tenet of faith of Orthodox Judaism, and was recognized as one of the Thirteen Principles of Faith by Maimonides. However, not all branches of Rabbinic Judaism accept the divine provenance of the Oral Torah, such that Conservative and (to a greater extent) Reform Jews give deference to the Talmudic sages while empowering themselves to formulate and adopt their own rulings and interpretations.

There have also been historical dissenters to the Oral Torah in its entirety, including adherents to Karaite Judaism, who attempt to derive their religious practice strictly from the Written Torah, using Scripture's most natural meaning to form their basis of Jewish law.

Rachel comments:

Orthodox Judaism today - is the continuation of the Law of the Pharisees.  Essentially Orthodox Jews are Pharisees.  HR teachers say that Paul was arguing against Pharisee-ism, NOT against the Laws of God.  They do not divide the Law into ceremonial, moral, or health laws.   

Edited June 16, 2015 by 8thdaypriest

[joeb]

​I'm not following what your response has to do with what I wrote.

​It's impossible to correctly understand why Jesus said many of the things He said, or why He said them unless you have a complete understanding of the Jewish religion at that time..  The same goes for Paul.  He was fully educated/indoctrinated into the Jewish ideas of law before he was converted.  Thus, to understand what he's talking about when he talks about the law you have to understand just what the Jews thought about the law, and they understood there was the 10 commandments, the Mosaic law(ceremonial), and then the multiple versions of the oral law which they held above the 10 commandments, the Torah, etc.... 

I can point you to a really good book on this if you're interested.  It was written by a Hebrew SDA who was a contemporary of Ellen White. 

I have to say he makes some things Ellen White has to say about "the Jews" come to life. 

Edited June 16, 2015 by joeb

[pnattmbtc]

I agree regarding the importance of understand Paul in the context of his time.  We tend to read into Paul a lot, especially from Reformation theology.  I'm studying a couple of things in regards to Paul right now.

Please feel free to post the name of the book you have in mind.