Under Law

[Gustave]

On 8/31/2019 at 4:58 PM, Ron Amnsn said:

The theory that God's laws can be divided in to man-made categories called "ceremonial" and "moral" is not a Biblical theory.  It is just a man-made theory that some people superimpose over the Word of God.  Scripture does not make use of those man-made categories, nor does Scripture even hint that such categories might be legitimate.  There is no method taught in Scripture that tells us how one might distinguish between "moral" or "ceremonial" laws nor do the Scriptures suggest that such categories might be necessary for any reason.  When YHWH gave the time-span for how long some of the so-called "ceremonial laws" should be obeyed, YHWH said those instructions were to be followed throughout the generations of the Israelites -- a time-span that has not yet ended.

Not a theory, the law is ONE unit and within it are commands that are "natural" to all people as well as commands that require specialized instructions - those types of commands are indeed ceremonial. 

[Ron Amnsn]

15 hours ago, Gustave said:

Not a theory, the law is ONE unit and within it are commands that are "natural" to all people as well as commands that require specialized instructions - those types of commands are indeed ceremonial. 

Gustave, I agree that God's law is one body of law.   Could you show from the Bible that commands that are "natural" to all people should be valid for a longer time-span than commands that require specialized instructions?  And can you share the Bible passages that teach that some of God's instructions should be classified as "ceremonial"?

[Gustave]

21 minutes ago, Ron Amnsn said:

Gustave, I agree that God's law is one body of law.   Could you show from the Bible that commands that are "natural" to all people should be valid for a longer time-span than commands that require specialized instructions?  And can you share the Bible passages that teach that some of God's instructions should be classified as "ceremonial"?

Thanks for the question Ron. You surprised me with your 1st sentence - I've not heard that answer from an SDA before. If you could humor me a little I'll briefly give you the theory of my case.

Deuteronomy 5 (the complete Chapter) and particularly verses 22 - 32.

From a 'Bible Only' perspective the Law was given as a single unit to the Children of Israel and the 1st 10 Commandments God thundered out terrified the people so much they asked / begged that God just relay the rest of it to Moses and that they [the Children of Israel] would listen to Moses. Scripture attests God not only agreed to do it this way but really appreciated that the people had this mind.

"But as for thee, stand thou here by me, and I will speak unto thee all the commandments, and the statutes, and the judgments, which thou shalt teach them, that they may do them in the land which I give them to possess it."

If God only got through what's generally understood to be the 10 Commandments before He stopped (out of Mercy for the people)  and further clarified that there were OTHER additional Commandments, Statutes, and judgments that were part of "the Law" He would relay to Moses and have Moses transmit to the people I conclude that there isn't two laws - but one Law.

Under the New Covenant the only Laws that are said to have passed away or were said to have  been fulfilled by Christ are those laws which would have required "specialized instruction" outside of nature.

Ancient cultures had laws prohibiting theft, murder, cheating, etc. and these cultures didn't have a Moses type individual or Deity that provided these prohibitions (in an external sense). Every society had laws  along these lines. I'm speaking of the things an ancient culture would have in common with the Children of Israel.

The Catechism of Trent explains it this way;

"With regard to the exposition of this Commandment, the faithful are carefully to be taught how it agrees with, and how it differs from the others, in order that they may understand why we observe and keep holy not Saturday but Sunday. 

The point of difference is evident. The other Commandments of the Decalogue are precepts of the natural law, obligatory at all times and unalterable. Hence, after the abrogation of the Law of Moses, all the Commandments contained in the two tables are observed by Christians, not indeed because their observance is commanded by Moses, but because they are in conformity with nature which dictates obedience to them. 

This Commandment about the observance of the Sabbath, on the other hand, considered as to the time appointed for its fulfillment, is not fixed and unalterable, but susceptible of change, and belongs not to the moral, but the ceremonial law. Neither is it a principle of the natural law; we are not instructed by nature to give external worship to God on that day, rather than on any other. And in fact the Sabbath was kept holy only from the time of the liberation of the people of Israel from the bondage of Pharaoh. The observance of the Sabbath was to be abrogated at the same time as the other Hebrew rites and ceremonies, that is, at the death of Christ. Having been, as it were, images which foreshadowed the light and the truth, these ceremonies were to disappear at the coming of that light and truth, which is Jesus Christ. Hence St. Paul, in his Epistle to the Galatians, when reproving the observers of the Mosaic rites, says: You observe days and months and times and years; I am afraid of you lest perhaps I have labored in vain amongst you. And he writes to the same effect to the Colossians. 

So much regarding the difference (between this and the other Commandments) ." 

 

[JoeMo]

2 hours ago, Gustave said:

Thanks for the question Ron. You surprised me with your 1st sentence - I've not heard that answer from an SDA before.

You still haven't heard it from an SDA . His moniker is "Not an SDA".  I believe Ron is either Messianic Jew or Hebrew Roots.  Nothing wrong with that - I really appreciate Ron's input here.

[debbym]

3 hours ago, Gustave said:

 

If God only got through what's generally understood to be the 10 Commandments before He stopped (out of Mercy for the people)  and further clarified that there were OTHER additional Commandments, Statutes, and judgments that were part of "the Law" He would relay to Moses and have Moses transmit to the people I conclude that there isn't two laws - but one Law.

Under the New Covenant the only Laws that are said to have passed away or were said to have  been fulfilled by Christ are those laws which would have required "specialized instruction" outside of nature.

Ancient cultures had laws prohibiting theft, murder, cheating, etc. and these cultures didn't have a Moses type individual or Deity that provided these prohibitions (in an external sense). Every society had laws  along these lines. I'm speaking of the things an ancient culture would have in common with the Children of Israel.

 

Abram/Abraham kept the laws of God.

 Genesis 26:5. 

⁵ because Abraham obeyed me and did everything I required of him, keeping my commands, my decrees and my instructions.” 

 

The Sabbath was given to Mankind before sin came, and it was a relational protection for the relationship between God and man as Creator, then later as Creator and Redeemer.  It was a command that never changed from the seven days of creation.  We do not know if it is also something held and experienced by the unfallen worlds or not.

 

Genesis 2 New International Version (NIV)

2 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array.

2 By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.

 

then the people were reminded of the gift of the Sabbath to His people before mt. sinai 

Exodus 16:23-30

BREAD FROM HEAVEN

23 he said to them, "This is what the Lord has commanded: 'Tomorrow is a day of l solemn rest, a holy Sabbath to the Lord; bake what you will bake and boil what you will boil, and all that is left over lay aside to be kept till the morning.'" 24 So they laid it aside till the morning, as Moses commanded them, and m it did not stink, and there were no worms in it. 25 Moses said, "Eat it today, for l today is a Sabbath to the Lord; today you will not find it in the field. 26 Six days you shall gather it, but on the seventh day, which is a Sabbath, there will be none."

27 On the seventh day some of the people went out to gather, but they found none. 28 And the Lord said to Moses,  "How long will you refuse to keep my commandments and my laws? 29 See! The Lord has given you the Sabbath; therefore on the sixth day he gives you bread for two days. Remain each of you in his place; let no one go out of his place on the seventh day." 30 So the people o rested on the seventh day.

[Gustave]

Debbym & JoeMoe

Im on an Indian dining adventure - if I survive it I’ll be back later this evening. 

[Ron Amnsn]

4 hours ago, Gustave said:

The Catechism of Trent explains it this way;

"With regard to the exposition of this Commandment, the faithful are carefully to be taught how it agrees with, and how it differs from the others, in order that they may understand why we observe and keep holy not Saturday but Sunday. 

The point of difference is evident. The other Commandments of the Decalogue are precepts of the natural law, obligatory at all times and unalterable. Hence, after the abrogation of the Law of Moses, all the Commandments contained in the two tables are observed by Christians, not indeed because their observance is commanded by Moses, but because they are in conformity with nature which dictates obedience to them.

Hi Gustave,
I think you're probably planning on adding to your answer, because you didn't answer with anything from the Bible.  This is just a man-made teaching that wants us to filter the Word of God through a man-made theory about so-called "natural law" and so-called "ceremonial law".

Part of this man-made theory states, "after the abrogation of the Law of Moses".  That part is not found anywhere in Scripture and directly contradicts the Word of God.  In fact Jesus directly commanded his followers, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law," (Matt 5:17) yet the statement you quoted was evidently written by people who have been thinking in depth along that very line of thinking that Jesus forbid us to think at all.  How could we possibly imagine that the authors of your statement were faithful followers of Jesus when the only difference between what they teach and what Jesus directly commanded his followers to not think would be a very subtle distinction between the word "abrogate" and the word "abolish".   Jesus went on to explain that men like those that you have quoted from would, "in the kingdom of heaven," be called "least".  Do those, who in the kingdom of heaven are called "least", have any authority to write catechisms to instruct others to also disregard God's Law so that they will also end up being called "least"?  If you're going to put forward man-made Catechisms as evidence to support a man-made theory about the Bible, couldn't you at least find a Catechism written by people like the great people that Jesus describes in Matthew 5:19, "but whoever does them [the least of the commandments of the Law of Moses] and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven." ?

 

[Gustave]

debbym,

Abraham DID follow God's commands & this is why Hebrews says what it does about his compliance. Since you like the NIV

Command: "Go from your country, your people and from your father's household to the land I will show you." 

Reaction: "So Abraham went, as the Lord had told him; and Lot went with him."

Hebrews 11, 8-13: Abraham did exactly as God told him to do - which had nothing to do with the Sabbath. St. Paul calls out Abraham as an illustration of how salvation is a combination of Faith + Works. Abraham believed and that caused him to cooperate with God, pick himself & his immediate Family up and MOVE - a HUGE DEAL in that culture and at that time. 

You're right, we DON'T know if Aliens, living on "other planets," are observing a seventh day Talmudic Sabbath. 

Genesis 2

Yes, "God" ceased from His creative works; "so on the seventh day HE RESTED from all HIS work."

God didn't create an environment in which weeds started to spring up along with what God wanted in the Garden of Eden so that Adam and Eve needed to bust sod and get their daily "weeding chores" in. In any event the Jews don't believe that Adam and Eve even made it through the Sabbath as their sin was understood to have taken place before the Morning of the 7th day. This is the point of Rosh Hashana. 

About the Exodus

Look at Exodus 16, 4. The Scripture says that God will "test" the Israelites to see IF they will follow His instructions. They didn't. 

Look at Exodus 16, 23. "tomorrow is to be a day of sabbath rest, a holy sabbath TO THE LORD". 

According to Jeremiah 32,30 since their Youth the Israelites have broken God's instructions so many times NO ONE KNOWS but God how many times. If God would have chosen the Egyptians or any other people the same thing would have happened so don't think I'm throwing the Jews under the bus because I'm not - this is humanity in general. The point I'm trying to show is that by the time the word Sabbath was 1st mentioned there had already been repeated infractions. 

 

 

[Gustave]

1 hour ago, Ron Amnsn said:

Hi Gustave,
I think you're probably planning on adding to your answer, because you didn't answer with anything from the Bible.  This is just a man-made teaching that wants us to filter the Word of God through a man-made theory about so-called "natural law" and so-called "ceremonial law".

Part of this man-made theory states, "after the abrogation of the Law of Moses".  That part is not found anywhere in Scripture and directly contradicts the Word of God.  In fact Jesus directly commanded his followers, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law," (Matt 5:17) yet the statement you quoted was evidently written by people who have been thinking in depth along that very line of thinking that Jesus forbid us to think at all.  How could we possibly imagine that the authors of your statement were faithful followers of Jesus when the only difference between what they teach and what Jesus directly commanded his followers to not think would be a very subtle distinction between the word "abrogate" and the word "abolish".   Jesus went on to explain that men like those that you have quoted from would, "in the kingdom of heaven," be called "least".  Do those, who in the kingdom of heaven are called "least", have any authority to write catechisms to instruct others to also disregard God's Law so that they will also end up being called "least"?  If you're going to put forward man-made Catechisms as evidence to support a man-made theory about the Bible, couldn't you at least find a Catechism written by people like the great people that Jesus describes in Matthew 5:19, "but whoever does them [the least of the commandments of the Law of Moses] and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven." ?

 

You are perceptive. I will be posting some Bible. 

[Gustave]

2 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

Hi Gustave,
I think you're probably planning on adding to your answer, because you didn't answer with anything from the Bible.  This is just a man-made teaching that wants us to filter the Word of God through a man-made theory about so-called "natural law" and so-called "ceremonial law".

Part of this man-made theory states, "after the abrogation of the Law of Moses".  That part is not found anywhere in Scripture and directly contradicts the Word of God.  In fact Jesus directly commanded his followers, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law," (Matt 5:17) yet the statement you quoted was evidently written by people who have been thinking in depth along that very line of thinking that Jesus forbid us to think at all.  How could we possibly imagine that the authors of your statement were faithful followers of Jesus when the only difference between what they teach and what Jesus directly commanded his followers to not think would be a very subtle distinction between the word "abrogate" and the word "abolish".   Jesus went on to explain that men like those that you have quoted from would, "in the kingdom of heaven," be called "least".  Do those, who in the kingdom of heaven are called "least", have any authority to write catechisms to instruct others to also disregard God's Law so that they will also end up being called "least"?  If you're going to put forward man-made Catechisms as evidence to support a man-made theory about the Bible, couldn't you at least find a Catechism written by people like the great people that Jesus describes in Matthew 5:19, "but whoever does them [the least of the commandments of the Law of Moses] and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven." ?

 

From the Catechism.

Psalms 147, 20: "He hath not done in like manner to every nation; and His judgements He hath not made manifest to them."

We can know from Sacred Scripture that the above is speaking of laws God made with Israel that He DIDN'T make with any other people.

Deutronomy 5, 2: The Lord our God made a covenant with US IN HOREB. The Lord made NOT this covenant with our Fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us alive here today." 

According to Scripture itself the concept that there are certain obligatory laws for ALL people and certain obligatory laws for SOME PEOPLE is about as Biblical as it can get. There were things that the Children of Israel were commanded to observe that their own forefathers were totally ignorant of. 

Psalms 147 is explicit that there were laws God gave the Nation of Israel which He had not made known to other nations or even to Israel's own forefathers. 

"And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his name Israel. And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins; And the land which I gave Abraham and Isaac, to thee I will give it, and to thy seed after thee will I give the land." Genesis 35, 10

Jacob would (in the future) father a nation and a company of nations but that hadn't happened just yet. Furthermore, I can guarantee you that Abraham and Isaac were further away from realizing "a nation" than Jacob was - by a very long shot. So, while you may believe the Catechism of the Catholic Church is a collection of man made teachings designed to filter out the truth from the word of God I'd advise you, out of Christian charity,  to prepare just a little more prior to making statements like that.

Matthew 5, 17: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

Prior to Christ, who fulfilled the law? Just prior to Jesus dying on the cross, when He said "it is finnished" - what was finnished? Did Jesus not say that after all was fulfilled things could pass from the law? 

Psalm 22, 31 indicates that when Jesus said "it is finished" He was affirming He had done what he came to do - He had reconciled the world to the Father. Subsequent to Jesus' fulfillment of "all things" ALL NATIONS were invited into the fold and early on it was determined that indeed SOME THINGS did pass away from "THE LAW". 

Acts 15, 5

Acts 15,10

Ephesians 2, 15

Galations 2,14

Now, as to the question about the Natural Law. 

1st Corinthians 11, 14: "Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?"

See also Romans 1,26 & 2,14

Romans 2, 27 in particular

Man is NOT commanded by Nature to circumcise, this was, like the Sabbath,a commandment which required direct transmission of the commandment. Exactly like the Catechism said, Man is not commanded by nature to observe one day over another day. 

I appreciate the question Ron 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Gustave:  In an earlier post, you said the following that I have quoted below:

I thought it might be of interest to some people reading this thread for me to comment on your statement.

*  Seventh-day Adventists do not have an official statement of belief on this subject.

*  However, SDAs do commonly believe that there are other (probably many) planets in the cosmos on which there is living, intelligent life.

*  They would commonly believe that the planet Earth is the only planet in the universe on which those living beings sinned.  Therefore, salvation is unique to the Earth, and life on    those planets exists in perfection as God had planed it.

*  SDAs would see the weekly Sabbath as a special time in which humans could fellowship with God.  This is not a denial of prayer and other such means of relating to God.  Rather it is simply a special time for spiritual enrichment and spiritual growth.

*  There is a  sense in which the weekly Sabbath is unique to the Earth.  This is not a denial of a similar time on the other planets that have intelligent life.  Rather it is simply an acknowledgement that any such Sabbath on other planets is beyond our specific knowledge.  We simply do not know how that Sabbath might be constituted. 

*  As SDAs believe in a 7-day creation of the Earth, with a Sabbath related to that creation,  so also those other planets could have a Sabbath related to their creation.  But, we are not informed as to anything about their creation, except that God created all and God's creation, as God created, was perfect and good. 

 

 

 

You're right, we DON'T know if Aliens, living on "other planets," are observing a seventh day Talmudic Sabbath. 

[8thdaypriest]

10 hours ago, Gustave said:

Matthew 5, 17: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

Prior to Christ, who fulfilled the law? Just prior to Jesus dying on the cross, when He said "it is finnished" - what was finnished? Did Jesus not say that after all was fulfilled things could pass from the law? 

I like your thought here Gustave.  No one, before Christ, had ever fulfilled the law.  He fulfilled it all.  And once He did, something could be changed in the law. 
 

[8thdaypriest]

The only thing I see specifically "changed" (using that word) is "the priesthood"  (Hebrews 7:12).  I believe the priesthood was changed BACK to what it was originally - "the firstborn".  That is how Jesus (who was not Levite) could become our High Priest, acting as the "one mediator" between God and man. 

[Gustave]

5 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Gustave:  In an earlier post, you said the following that I have quoted below:

I thought it might be of interest to some people reading this thread for me to comment on your statement.

*  Seventh-day Adventists do not have an official statement of belief on this subject.

*  However, SDAs do commonly believe that there are other (probably many) planets in the cosmos on which there is living, intelligent life.

*  They would commonly believe that the planet Earth is the only planet in the universe on which those living beings sinned.  Therefore, salvation is unique to the Earth, and life on    those planets exists in perfection as God had planed it.

*  SDAs would see the weekly Sabbath as a special time in which humans could fellowship with God.  This is not a denial of prayer and other such means of relating to God.  Rather it is simply a special time for spiritual enrichment and spiritual growth.

*  There is a  sense in which the weekly Sabbath is unique to the Earth.  This is not a denial of a similar time on the other planets that have intelligent life.  Rather it is simply an acknowledgement that any such Sabbath on other planets is beyond our specific knowledge.  We simply do not know how that Sabbath might be constituted. 

*  As SDAs believe in a 7-day creation of the Earth, with a Sabbath related to that creation,  so also those other planets could have a Sabbath related to their creation.  But, we are not informed as to anything about their creation, except that God created all and God's creation, as God created, was perfect and good. 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks Gregory, I can't remember where it was I read it but know I've seen something written (possibly by Ellen White) whereas it was asserted that on an alien planet the E.T.'s living there had a copy of the 10 Commandments and commandment about the Sabbath was glowing or in some way markedly illustrated indicating it was more important than the other 9 commandments.  

Its interesting and to note I believe that somewhere out there (in space) is likely a planet with intelligent life on it. I would doubt however that the planet would have exactly the same moon with the same distance and the same orbit around the sun as we do here. Possible but not likely.

[8thdaypriest]

Good point that circumcision is not something "natural".  I do agree that Paul did not teach any necessity for believing Gentiles to be circumcised (Galatians Cpt 5).  "Was anyone called while uncircumcised? Let him not be circumcised" (1Co 7:18 NKJ).

Just thinking about what comes "natural" for men. I would say that stealing, adultery, murder, lying and coveting all come "natural".  Why would we see so much of it, if it didn't come naturally.  Worship of "gods" other than the One, seems to come naturally too. 

And since when does monogamous lifetime marriage come "naturally" for men.  That one began quite early too - in the Bible record.  (Yes males have always tried to corral their females, to maintain control over them.  Animals do the same.)

Any laws of other nations, that are the same or similar to those spoken by the LORD from Sinai, all have their source from Noah (and Noah's God). 

The Gentiles described by Paul (Rom 2:14) were doing "naturally" the things of the Law, because they had come to believe in Christ and He was writing His law on their hearts, as His "New Covenant" promised.  The rest of the Gentiles were NOT doing the things of the Law. 

[Gustave]

5 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

The only thing I see specifically "changed" (using that word) is "the priesthood"  (Hebrews 7:12).  I believe the priesthood was changed BACK to what it was originally - "the firstborn".  That is how Jesus (who was not Levite) could become our High Priest, acting as the "one mediator" between God and man. 

Yes, and firstborn can also mean "preeminent" - in other words - radically superior to all other priests. I would agree with this. 

[8thdaypriest]

2 minutes ago, Gustave said:

Thanks Gregory, I can't remember where it was I read it but know I've seen something written (possibly by Ellen White) whereas it was asserted that on an alien planet the E.T.'s living there had a copy of the 10 Commandments and commandment about the Sabbath was glowing or in some way markedly illustrated indicating it was more important than the other 9 commandments.  

Its interesting and to note I believe that somewhere out there (in space) is likely a planet with intelligent life on it. I would doubt however that the planet would have exactly the same moon with the same distance and the same orbit around the sun as we do here. Possible but not likely.

I think that was the vision where she was describing Jesus in the Most Holy Place, standing before the Ark. 

[Gustave]

10 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Good point that circumcision is not something "natural".  I do agree that Paul did not teach any necessity for believing Gentiles to be circumcised (Galatians Cpt 5).  "Was anyone called while uncircumcised? Let him not be circumcised" (1Co 7:18 NKJ).

Just thinking about what comes "natural" for men. I would say that stealing, adultery, murder, lying and coveting all come "natural".  Why would we see so much of it, if it didn't come naturally.  Worship of "gods" other than the One, seems to come naturally too. 

And since when does monogamous lifetime marriage come "naturally" for men.  That one began quite early too - in the Bible record.  (Yes males have always tried to corral their females, to maintain control over them.  Animals do the same.)

Any laws of other nations, that are the same or similar to those spoken by the LORD from Sinai, all have their source from Noah (and Noah's God). 

The Gentiles described by Paul (Rom 2:14) were doing "naturally" the things of the Law, because they had come to believe in Christ and He was writing His law on their hearts, as His "New Covenant" promised.  The rest of the Gentiles were NOT doing the things of the Law. 

Ron asked me: "Could you show from the Bible that commands that are "natural" to all people should be valid for a longer time-span than commands that require specialized instructions?"

Exodus 4, 24-26 contrasted with the New Testament Scripture you quoted (along with the one I cited) would appear to show the Natural law continued to be valid after "the change" in the supernatural or ceremonial law. If the Law is ONE unit ( as Ron agreed ) this would seem to be a point in Catholicism's favor in this area.  

[Gustave]

16 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Good point that circumcision is not something "natural".  I do agree that Paul did not teach any necessity for believing Gentiles to be circumcised (Galatians Cpt 5).  "Was anyone called while uncircumcised? Let him not be circumcised" (1Co 7:18 NKJ).

Just thinking about what comes "natural" for men. I would say that stealing, adultery, murder, lying and coveting all come "natural".  Why would we see so much of it, if it didn't come naturally.  Worship of "gods" other than the One, seems to come naturally too. 

And since when does monogamous lifetime marriage come "naturally" for men.  That one began quite early too - in the Bible record.  (Yes males have always tried to corral their females, to maintain control over them.  Animals do the same.)

Any laws of other nations, that are the same or similar to those spoken by the LORD from Sinai, all have their source from Noah (and Noah's God). 

The Gentiles described by Paul (Rom 2:14) were doing "naturally" the things of the Law, because they had come to believe in Christ and He was writing His law on their hearts, as His "New Covenant" promised.  The rest of the Gentiles were NOT doing the things of the Law. 

Murder may come natural to all men ( we are inclined to do what Cain did ) however all ancient cultures had laws prohibiting this behavior - cultures which had zero Jewish or Christian Influence. Jews call these the Laws of Noah and also believe Gentiles are compelled to observe them "by nature". This is one of the reasons many Jews today and back then thought they were better than the average bear (in a way they were) because God did choose them to impart "special" or supernatural knowledge of things (laws) that they couldn't have known by natural means. 

[Gustave]

12 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I think that was the vision where she was describing Jesus in the Most Holy Place, standing before the Ark. 

I can't remember where it was - only that it was in the context of aliens on another planet.

[Gregory Matthews]

Gudtsve.  I am out and about now.  I will attempt to remember to respond lster to your commrnts about EGW and life on other plansts.

[8thdaypriest]

7 minutes ago, Gustave said:

Ron asked me: "Could you show from the Bible that commands that are "natural" to all people should be valid for a longer time-span than commands that require specialized instructions?"

Exodus 4, 24-26 contrasted with the New Testament Scripture you quoted (along with the one I cited) would appear to show the Natural law continued to be valid after "the change" in the supernatural or ceremonial law. If the Law is ONE unit ( as Ron agreed ) this would seem to be a point in Catholicism's favor in this area.  

I never call it "the ceremonial law".   Some of the "forms" have changed.  Otherwise the Law remains.  "The priesthood" has been "changed" to Christ and all those who are "in Christ".   Circumcision of the flesh (prophetic) has become "circumcision of the heart", and one day will be true circumcision of our flesh, when we exchange this flesh for our new spiritual bodies.  The Law "written on stones" is now written on our hearts.  

When the LORD told Jeremiah that He would write His law on Israel's heart and mind, I seriously doubt Jeremiah understood God to say, "My law minus the Sabbath command."  God said their hearts would be soft, rather than "stone". 

Jeremiah 31:33 "This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time," declares the LORD. "I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. (Jer 31:33 NIV)

Isaiah 66:23 makes it clear that mankind will still worship the LORD on His sabbaths.  If you want to include all of the LORD's "appointed times", that's fine.  The Rest of the 7th Day is one of the LORD's appointed times - right along with the rest. 

Why would "the church" stop resting/worshiping on the Sabbath for 2000 years, just to start doing it again in the New Earth?  Doesn't make sense. 

[Personally I wish the Adventists had commemorated all of the LORD's appointed times, instead of just the 7th Day Rest.  For all their emphasis on the Day of Atonement, I never once heard them point out which day it was in any real-time year, or encourage anyone to fast or pray on that day.]

Leviticus 23:2 "Speak to the sons of Israel, and say to them, 'The LORD's appointed times which you shall proclaim as holy convocations-- My appointed times are these: 3 'For six days work may be done; but on the seventh day there is a sabbath of complete rest, a holy convocation. You shall not do any work; it is a sabbath to the LORD in all your dwellings." (Lev 23:2 NAS)

[Gustave]

4 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I never call it "the ceremonial law".   Some of the "forms" have changed.  Otherwise the Law remains.  "The priesthood" has been "changed" to Christ and all those who are "in Christ".   Circumcision of the flesh (prophetic) has become "circumcision of the heart", and one day will be true circumcision of our flesh, when we exchange this flesh for our new spiritual bodies.  The Law "written on stones" is now written on our hearts.  

When the LORD told Jeremiah that He would write His law on Israel's heart and mind, I seriously doubt Jeremiah understood God to say, "My law minus the Sabbath command."  God said their hearts would be soft, rather than "stone". 

Jeremiah 31:33 "This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time," declares the LORD. "I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. (Jer 31:33 NIV)

Isaiah 66:23 makes it clear that mankind will still worship the LORD on His sabbaths.  If you want to include all of the LORD's "appointed times", that's fine.  The Rest of the 7th Day is one of the LORD's appointed times - right along with the rest. 

Why would "the church" stop resting/worshiping on the Sabbath for 2000 years, just to start doing it again in the New Earth?  Doesn't make sense. 

[Personally I wish the Adventists had commemorated all of the LORD's appointed times, instead of just the 7th Day Rest.  For all their emphasis on the Day of Atonement, I never once heard them point out which day it was in any real-time year, or encourage anyone to fast or pray on that day.]

Leviticus 23:2 "Speak to the sons of Israel, and say to them, 'The LORD's appointed times which you shall proclaim as holy convocations-- My appointed times are these: 3 'For six days work may be done; but on the seventh day there is a sabbath of complete rest, a holy convocation. You shall not do any work; it is a sabbath to the LORD in all your dwellings." (Lev 23:2 NAS)

Isaiah 66, 23 also  (according to your view) makes it clear that mankind will still worship the Lord on His New Moons. This is either Literal (like the World's Last Chance folks say) or Isaiah's statement means that month by month and week by week all people will eventually worship the Lord.

I somehow think if we could use a time machine and go back and talk to Isaiah - tell him that God abrogated circumcision, sacrifice and the Sabbath he wouldn't believe any of it. 

[8thdaypriest]

1 hour ago, Gustave said:

Isaiah 66, 23 also  (according to your view) makes it clear that mankind will still worship the Lord on His New Moons. This is either Literal (like the World's Last Chance folks say) or Isaiah's statement means that month by month and week by week all people will eventually worship the Lord.

I somehow think if we could use a time machine and go back and talk to Isaiah - tell him that God abrogated circumcision, sacrifice and the Sabbath he wouldn't believe any of it. 

Didn't abrogate the Sabbath. 

And yes - month by month at the New Moon, and week by week - we will go up to the New Jerusalem, to worship the LORD. 

[Gustave]

5 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Didn't abrogate the Sabbath. 

And yes - month by month at the New Moon, and week by week - we will go up to the New Jerusalem, to worship the LORD. 

Do you interpret Colossians 2, 16-17 to indicate that St. Paul was actually instructing Christians to observe the annual festivals, the monthly festival (new Moon day) and the weekly Sabbath AND to not let anyone negatively judge the observance?