Bible Discussions on SDA Doctrines (The Law and the Prophets)

Special Note To The Reader of This Blog Exchange:

A brother and I, both members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, are discussing themes in our Church’s theological development.  He holds that Ellen White’s writings are as authoritative as Scripture even in the face of direct Biblical teachings, which appear different.  For example he holds, among other things, the following:

  1. Ellen White has made 17 specific comments on Christmas, approving both the “day” and the “tree” as items to be used for the Glory of God.  I see differently, that Christmas is pagan (heathen worship), and has no resemblance to “truth,” and should not be practiced by informed Christians.
  2. Ellen White has made statements to the effect that at the Last Supper, Christ instituted the “communion service,” which effectively has replaced the Passover, and as a result the Passover on the 14th of Abib (Nissan), is no longer relevant for Christians.  I argue differently, that the “communion” is a foreign feast to the early Church, and they know only the Passover.
  3. My friend also holds that Ellen White has not had to recant any major teachings of hers, and that her prophecy on “Old Jerusalem,” for example, is very relevant and accurate to the Bible’s testimony, even after 1948 when the Jewish State was established.  I argue completely differently, and prove from the Bible alone that God has a latter-day plan for the Holy Land, including Old Jerusalem.
  4. That the “Ceremonial law” was nailed to the Cross, when Christ died on Calvary, leaving in force only “the Moral law.”  I argue that this division is not Biblical, and is of Catholic origins.

This area will be appended as necessary.

****************

This is Geoff’s Opening Statement  (Some personal content redacted)

My Dear Brother Garrick,
Thanks for the newsletter.  I find it very interesting.
Please help me.  It seems you observe Passover.  How do you observe Passover and by which directive?  I can’t seem to find record of the observance among true Christians after John 19:14.
In fact 1 Corinthians 5:7 says, “Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.”
And so I am not seeing the Feast Days being observed formally as formerly among the apostles and disciples, and not among even our Seventh-day Adventist pioneers, even up to the passing of Mrs. Ellen G. White.  So please help me to understand the emphasis on Feast Days now.
image
Should the church still celebrate the feast of tabern…

Caller:&#160 My sister wanted to know if denominations or churches still celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles?
Preview by Yahoo
image
Feast Days and Sabbaths

A powerful answer to the mistaken view that the Ten Commandments were part of the ceremonial law. Great for sharing….
Preview by Yahoo
I also found this quite interesting:
“Christ was nailed to the cross between the third and sixth hour, that is, between nine and twelve o’clock. In the afternoon He died. This was the hour of the evening sacrifice. Then the veil of the temple, that which hid God’s glory from the view of the congregation of Israel, was rent in twain from top to bottom.
“Through Christ the hidden glory of the holy of holies was to stand revealed. He had suffered death for every man, and by this offering the sons of men were to become the sons of God. With open face, beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, believers in Christ were to be changed into the same image, from glory to glory. The mercy seat, upon which the glory of God rested in the holiest of all, is opened to all who accept Christ as the propitiation for sin, and through its medium, they are brought into fellowship with God. The veil is rent, the partition walls broken down, the handwriting of ordinances canceled. By virtue of His blood the enmity is abolished. Through faith in Christ Jew and Gentile may partake of the living bread” (Letter 230, 1907).
What are your thoughts on this?
Sincerely,
*** Geoff ***

*******************************

Garrick’s First Response:

Hello Brother Geoff:

Thanks for your feedback.  Your questions regarding the biblical Feasts are very exciting and interesting to me.  I have written extensively on this topic, and want to develop this dialogue with a desire to discover truth.
Your question: “How do you observe Passover and by which directive?”
 
I observe Passover just like I do the weekly Sabbath.  Anciently the Sabbath was a day for offering a double sacrifice to God (Num. 28: 88-10), but we no longer offer a slain animal, since “Christ our passover is sacrificed for us.” (1 Cor. 5:7).
 
The “directive” by which I observe Passover is one given by Christ and embraced by the Apostles.  To see this clear command requires you to read more than what is read on any given “communion.”  Let me illustrate:
14When the hour had come, He reclined at the table, and the apostles with Him. 15And He said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; 16for I say to you, I shall never again eat it [Passover] until it [Passover] is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” 17And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He said, “Take this and share it among yourselves; 18for I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the kingdom of God comes.” 19And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you; do this [Passover] in remembrance of Me.” Luke 22: 14-19. ASV
 
Observe that we have singular commandment from Christ to “do” the Passover in memory of His great sacrifice for us, with a looking forward to to the “kingdom of God.”  I find this interesting, because those who say “Passover was fulfilled at the Cross,” are not saying what He teaches. He very clearly taught that Passover will be “fulfilled in the kingdom of God,” and event and experience yet future even to our times!  This being true, we can see the wisdom of Chris in eating Passover with us when he returns.  I know this in not classical Adventism, but it is very Biblical, and at some point we will have to confront the Bible, outside of church doctrines.
 
Here’s Ellen White on the actions and ministry of the Apostles: “At Philippi Paul tarried to keep the Passover. Only Luke remained with him, the other members of the company passing on to Troas to await him there. The Philippians were the most loving and truehearted of the apostle’s converts, and during the eight days of the feast [Passover] he enjoyed peaceful and happy communion with them.”  Acts of The Apostles, pp. 390-391.
 
Notice that Paul kept the Passover with the Philippians, who were not fundamentally “Jewish”, these are not the Jerusalem Christians, but at Phillippi.  Think of what this means with the life and teachings of Paul, over 20 years beyond the cross, when these things should have been “abolished,” by our church doctrines!
 
I don’t know if you realized it when you quoted these passages, but I shall recast them with emphasis:  “ For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: therefore let us keep the feast [of passover], not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread ofsincerity and truth.” 1 Cor. 5: 7, 8.
 
Note carefully that Paul has enjoined on these half-bread Greeks (Gentiles), decades after the cross, to “keep the feast.”  This is an Apostolic command in keeping with that of Christ’s prior to his death.
 
I love and respect Doug Bachelor and Joe Crews, but must respectfully disagree with their handling of this subject.  I have written extensively on this topic, covering all your questions and am sending another two such articles:
 
1)  Rediscovering Passover in the Christian Church, examines this subject from both an historical as well as theological perspective
2)  Ceremonial Laws–my most recent document on this question
 
Please see these in two following emails.
 
Shalom in Messiah, let’s keep this conversation going.
 
Garrick

 

*****

Geoff’s Response

Good morning Garrick,…

I am responding on my phone right now. I promise to carefully and prayerfully review all the attachments when I get to my office later.

Thank you for these three responses. This is a very important topic. The Bible and SOP shed specific light on which we are not allowed to place our own twist. I find only in surrendering to the teaching of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:20) in all observances will we discover exactly what the will of God is. Believe me, I did not include both verses of  1 Corinthians 5: 7, 8 by accident.

I dare not handle God’s word without asking Him for His wisdom and correct understanding of His will. As I read I listen for God’s still small voice to my soul as He helps me filter out my freshly bias and obey the truth.

Please, let us keep the dialogue open. I am convinced God will help us to “speak the same thing” because there is only one truth.

Your brother in Christ,
*** Geoff ***

PS. If you are comfortable please share these exchanges with our mutual friend R. since it was he who brought us together.

************************

Geoff’s Additional Response

Dear Garrick,
I appreciate the great scholarship and veracity with which you have pursued the subjects of the time of Christ’s birth, the keeping of the feast days and the role of the papacy in obscuring truth.  I need more time to review all that you have produced, as I’m sure it took you hours and days to assemble such a thorough work.
So far I have noted a few things that prompt the following responses:
First of all, I pick and choose my battles, and this is not one of them.  Whether or not one celebrates Christ’s birth on December 25 or during the Feast of Tabernacles is neither here nor there according to what I understand from scriptures and the Spirit of Prophecy.
“One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike.  Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. “ — Romans 14:5.
“The 25th of December has long been commemorated as the day of Jesus’ birth, and …it is not my purpose to affirm or question the propriety of celebrating this event on this day, but to dwell upon the childhood and life of our Saviour…
“What matchless love Jesus has manifested for a fallen world! If angels sang because the Saviour was born in Bethlehem, shall not our hearts echo the glad strain, Glory to God in the highest, peace on earth, good will to men? Although we do not know the exact day of Christ’s birth, we would honor the sacred event. May the Lord forbid that any one should be so narrow minded as to overlook the event because there is an uncertainty in regard to the exact time…” — The Review and Herald, December 17, 1889.
Something occurred to me as I reviewed this material.  While God chose to inform some like the shepherds and the wise men of Jesus’ birth, still, for divine reasons I do not know, God chose not to reveal the exact time or to keep this significant event obscured even from others who earnestly and sincerely desired to know:
The shepherds who were tending their sheep, not celebrating the Feast of Booths (Luke 2)
And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.
And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.
10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
15 And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known unto us.
16 And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger.
17 And when they had seen it, they made known abroad the saying which was told them concerning this child.
18 And all they that heard it wondered at those things which were told them by the shepherds.
19 But Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart.
20 And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things that they had heard and seen, as it was told unto them.
The wise men in Matthew 2.  Please notice this was not the exact time Jesus was born even based on Herod’s uncertainty in killing children “from two years old and under” according to verse 16.
Simeon and Anna missed the birth but made the dedication/presentation to the Lord (weren’t they observing God’s statutes):
22 And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;
23 (As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;)
24 And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons.
25 And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.
26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord’s Christ.
27 And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him after the custom of the law,
28 Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said,
29 Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word:
30 For mine eyes have seen thy salvation,
31 Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people;
32 A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.
33 And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.
34 And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against;
35 (Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also,) that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.
36 And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity;
37 And she was a widow of about fourscore and four years, which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day.
38 And she coming in that instant gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.
You see, there are so many others you must discount as unfaithful to maintain the theory that only those who were in the right place (the fields) at the right time (The Feast of Tabernacles) were faithful.  We can’t have it both ways.  If they were still strictly and exactly following the order of Abijah then it would be reasonable to expect there were others besides the shepherds who should have witnessed the angels’ message in Luke 2:10-14.
Likewise, wouldn’t it be just as dangerous to assume “only those in the right place, and at the right time, in the end of the time of the end, will ‘hear the day and hour of’ the second advent of our Redeemer”?  Or are you saying some who will not hear will still be saved?
“Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”  John 5:28, 29.
I am concerned about the stated and implied conclusions.  I supposed you included the Who Were The Waldenses document to demonstrate how the Catholic Church rid the Protestant Church of the Feast Days, yet this material is hardpressed to come up with evidence.  Case in point, the Times and Laws document has a misleading section – Did The Early Church Keep The 7th Day Sabbath And All Other Festival Sabbaths?  I was looking forward to some evidence that the early church actually kept the feast days.  Imagine my disappointment when I only saw information on the early church keeping the 7th day Sabbath as I already knew.  I spotted nothing on the early church’s feast day observances until the next section regarding theFeast of Passover.
And so Brother Augustus, please help me understand what Colossians 2:14-17 is talking about.  Which law was nailed to the cross?  You said you respectfully disagree with AmazingFacts.  Do you agree with the distinction between the moral and ceremonial laws?
In your May newsletter baton passing analogy you failed to include Jesus commandment to observe the Feast Days.  I mean it is OK that you quoted the Old Testament, but if you paint with such a broad brush then we must necessarily still practice animal sacrifice or be cut off.  Please notice what Peter, James and Paul, who faithfully followed Jesus, admonished in Acts 15:
And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.
But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.
And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.
19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, andfrom fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath day.
22 Then pleased it the apostles and elders with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas and Silas, chief men among the brethren:
23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia.
24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:
25 It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul,
26 Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
27 We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth.
28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
BTW, what is your position on circumcision?  Do you have any light from the Adventist pioneers that sheds light on the subject?
Thanks again for the healthy exchange.
Sincerely,
*** Geoff ***

Garrick’s Response

Brother Geoff:
This subject is quite broad, and I believe an effective approach is for us to be settled on What Christ instructed us in Luke 22: 14-19:
As a result then, I’d like to break up our conversation into smaller bite sizes.
1) The “directive” by which I observe Passover is the one given by Christ and embraced by the Apostles.  To see this clear command requires us to read more than what is read on any given “communion” Sabbath.  Let me illustrate:
14When the hour had come, He reclined at the table, and the apostles with Him. 15And He said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; 16for I say to you, I shall never again eat it [Passover] until it [Passover] is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” 17And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He said, “Take this and share it among yourselves; 18for I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the kingdom of God comes.” 19And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you; do this [Passover] in remembrance of Me.” Luke 22: 14-19. ASV
 
Observe that we have singular commandment from Christ to “do” the Passover in memory of His great sacrifice for us, with a looking forward to to the “kingdom of God.”  I find this interesting, because those who say “Passover was fulfilled at the Cross,” are not saying what He teaches. He very clearly taught that Passover will be “fulfilled in the kingdom of God,” and event and experience yet future even to our times!
My question:  Does Jesus expect to “fuilfill” passover in the future kingdom of glory, or has it already been “fulfilled” at the Cross?  I believe a correct answer to this question will help us in a BIG way to appreciate the relevance of this festival throughout the Christian diaspora.
2)  Regarding Christmas, Ellen White had to grow into a clearer knowledge of this pagan festival.  Let me illustrate from a quote in a previous article I wrote on the subject:
Here one can clearly see the progression of Ellen White’s understanding of the pagan holidays.  in 1879 thru 1884 she gave broad sweeping approval, then ten years later, in 1894 she would say “these days have no more influence for good than would the worship of heathen deities; for this is really nothing less.”  This is honest to goodness growth, and we can really trust this statement for it is prefaced with “From the light that the Lord has given me,” as opposed to “letters have come to the office asking….”
•”God would be well pleased if on Christmas, each church would have a Christmas tree on which shall be hung offerings, great and small, for these houses of worship.” Review and Herald, Dec. 11, 1879 ; see also Review and Herald, Dec. 9, 1884.  (Also to be found in The Adventist Home, p. 477; emphasis supplied
•“The youth in this country [Australia] require more earnest spiritual labor than in any other country we have yet visited. Temptations are strong and numerous; the many holidays and the habits of idleness are most unfavorable for the young. …But from their youth up they have been educated to the popular idea that the appointed holidays must be treated with respect and be observed. From the light that the Lord has given me, these days have no more influence for good than would the worship of heathen deities; for this is really nothing less. These days are Satan’s special harvest seasons. The money drawn from men and women is expended for that which is not bread. The youth are educated to love those things which are demoralizing, things which the word of God condemns. The influence is evil and only evil continually.” {FE 320.3-321, (1923); Originally written in “Special Testimonies On Education, February, 1894”}
Did you notice how she came to the correct Biblical position?  We must be careful not to make Ellen White an authority above the Bible, but to always harmonize with it.  The Bible is very clear in Jer. 10: 1-6, that the cutting of the tree and decking it with silver and gold, and offering presents thereon is “heathen” worship, but Sister White had not always seen that.  The Bible must be our final authority on all doctrines, that’s the Protestant creed.
When you go to the pagan (heathen) Christmas tree and present your gift under its bowers or on its branches, you are in essence “bowing” to the tree.  Remember even in this the 3 Hebrew Worthies were impeccable–they did not “bow” to the idol on the plains of Dura (Babylon).
3)  You cited many verses from Acts 15.  Look at thiese again:
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.
19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, andfrom fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath day.
Since, by our Adventist definition, the “Ceremonial Law” has been nailed to the Cross, leaving only the “Moral Law”–10 Commandments.  Here are some questions to consider:
  1. Where is there prohibition in the 10 commandments to “abstain from things strangled”?
  2. Where is there prohibition in the 10 commandments to “abstain “from [eating] blood”?
  3. Where is there prohibition in the 10 commandments to “abstain from” eating unclean animals, such as the swine, and lobsters?
  4. Where is there prohibition in the 10 commandments against homosexuality and bestiality?
  5. Where is there a command in the 10 commandments to return a tithe (10th) of ones increase?
The fact of the matter is this, the Apostles were teaching “Gentiles” (v. 19), and could not demand of them to come up to the full embodiment of the Torah, and so in this primer, gave them just a few initiating steps, and encouraged them to come to the Synagogue every Sabbath, because “Moses of old time has in every city them that preach the law with clarity” (v 21 paraphrased), so the new believer (Gentile) would be initiated into the new faith.
Realize that even after this event, we find Paul keeping Passover and Pentecost (read Acts 18 and 20).
4)  Regarding the shepherds, I was not alluding that they were keeping Tabernacles, but that they were in the right place at the right time, and as such were specially honored of Heaven to bear the the glad tidings of the Saviour’s birth.  God passed by the Rabbinical schools of learning, He passed by the Sanhedrin, He passed by the Temple leaders, and found lowly Shepherds in their fields at the time of Tabernacles.
Christians today want to recognize the birth of Christ, but are left to compete with a “heathen deity,” by honoring His birth on the 25th of December, when God has never timed his appointments to coincide with Pagan rituals.  When you examine all the festivals in Lev. 23, you will realize that they all have a redemptive focus, and that all the major events in the history of salvation have occurred around these divinely appointed holy times.
I believe this is a good start for now.
Regarding my position on the “ceremonial law”, I have amply treated this in my articles: Rediscovering Passover and Ceremonial Laws and Jewish Feasts.  I believe the Catholics have clearly spoken and taken ownership for this theology, and I will have no part with it.  I do realize that Ellen White uses the terminology, but when she does, she also defines that term, and restricts it solely to the law of sacrifices.
I look forward to hearing from you on these matters.
Shalom in Messiah,
Garrick
**********
Geoff’s Response 
Hi Garrick,
I don’t mind keeping this bite sized.  Great idea!
You have made a number of insertions and assumptions in Luke 22:14-19.  This seems to be a very important point, so let’s see if we can gain the same understanding on this passage:
14 And when the hour was come, He sat down, and the twelve apostles with Him.
15 And He said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer:
16 For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.
17 And He took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves:
18 For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.
19 And He took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is My body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of Me.
Would you agree with me that at this point Jesus is instituting what we now call the Communion Service (along with the Ordinance of Humility/Foot Washing Service)?  Would you also agree with me that this is no longer the old Passover Service (Exodus 12) on the 14th day of the first month because now they have Lamb of God with them.  There may have been a lamb, but Luke doesn’t mention it in this new ordinance Jesus is setting up here.  He doesn’t say the lamb represents Him.  He says the bread represents Him (I’m just talking about here in this important context).  Now let’s say, they already ate the passover lamb and now Jesus is setting up the Communion in verses 17 through 19.  If Jesus intended for them to continue the original Passover, just leaving out the lamb, then He would have to include that directive at this point.
But that’s not what we see in the Bible, because Paul says in 1 Corinthians 11:24-27:
23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which He was betrayed took bread:
24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of Me.
25 After the same manner also He took the cup, when He had supped, saying, this cup is the New Testament in My blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of Me.
26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till He come.
Furthermore, if we were still following the old Passover, not only would we still have to have a lamb, but also no one who is not circumcised could participate according to Exodus 12:44, 48.  So I ask you again, what of physical circumcision?  Do you require circumcision?  I believe it’s always been a matter of circumcision of the heart (see such as Deuteronomy 10:16, Deuteronomy 30:6, Jeremiah 4:4, and Romans2:29), but in order to participate in Passover in the OT you had to be physically circumcised.
So Communion is now in remembrance of Jesus, not Passover!  Communion is practiced after the cross; Passover, before.  And so in answer to your question, Jesus has already fulfilled the Passover!  He will not eat again with us until He eats with us in the Kingdom!
As for Ellen G. White on Christmas, you have already proven that she was consistent 1879 through 1884.  She did not change her mind.  She has never told us to celebrate the way the world celebrates Christmas, but the SOP is replete with consistent counsel and there need not be any issues on the matter and how to observe Christmas appropriately.  I have no problem saying Merry Christmas any more than saying today is Thursday (Thor’s Day).  We are in this world, not of it.
The five questions can be addressed as one.  The fact that it is the ceremonial law and not the moral law (Ten Commandments) that have been nailed to the cross when type meets antitype in Jesus (the death of the Testator) proves that the portions of Moses’ instructions that are still applicable today are dietary standards (because there is no difference in Israelite physiology from ours – so no unclean foods, strangled or blood-filled and improperly prepared and handled flesh foods), hygienic standards (still hold – that obvious and we have the Dark Ages to prove it), homosexuality is covered in the 7th Commandment (not only in Moses’ instructions concerning the execution of sodomites, Deuteronomy 23:17), and tithing predates and succeeds the Mosaic law (Genesis 4:2-4, 14:20, and Hebrews 7:5-9).  You see, there’s nothing in the 10 Commandments to be nailed to the cross.  So I think you agree with me that it was not the 10 Commandments that was nailed to the cross.  So please answer me, what was nailed to the cross if not the Mosaic Law with the ceremonial rituals and the Feast Day observances?  Not saying they are not significant or should be ignored, just not obligatory, in fact some may be offensive to God if performed as prescribed in the Bible!
And so it makes more sense that Acts 15 was relieving the obligation to observe these Feasts.  I failed to find in Acts 18 and 20 where Paul observed the Feasts other than to seek an opportunity to reason with and win the Jews to convert them to following Jesus.
Did I miss anything in this bite-sized response?
*** Geoff ***
Garrick’s Response

Brother Geoff:

Allow me to state this much.  My purpose for our discussions is not to brow beat you into seeing things my way, but to discover truth.  I don’t have an agenda to protect, but the truth of the Holy Scriptures.  So in this regard, I am very open to the leading of the Holy Spirit.  I have known for a long while now that when we dig-in our spiritual heels, and dress ourselves up in other people’s spectacles, then we cannot see more than they have seen.  As a young boy growing up, it never ceased to amaze me that the yam vines never grew much beyond the tendril on which they were trained, and form the Physical Sciences, I also know that we cannot reach any higher than the ladder on which we climb.  For some people this ladder is Moses, for others it is Luther, and for still others it is Ellen White.  Well, this is where I differ: the ladder on which I climb is the one Jacob saw angels ascending and descent on—even the ladder of the Man Christ Jesus.

I am moved to say this at this juncture, because I don’t want you to get in the defensive posture to think that in acknowledging what the Bible teaches that you are somehow losing something!  I used to see things from your vantage point, remember I am a baptized Seventh-day Adventist from the Island of Jamaica.  I have spent much time studying all that our church teaches on every theological subject, including the health message.  I have kept and read Joe Crews book against God’s festivals for many years, and saw things thee very way he projected them, and was I ever so blind!

There was a time when I thought that there were no sacrificed done on the weekly Sabbath, and only on the “ceremonial law” Sabbaths, and I was able to “defend” this with Joe Crew’s book, until the Holy Spirit broke my spectacles and bade me to read the Bible with the eyes of the one who dictated the Scriptures, and when I did, I discovered these verses:

“9 ¶  And on the Sabbath day two lambs of the first year without spot, and two tenth deals of flour for a meat offering, mingled with oil, and the drink offering thereof: (10)  This is the burnt offering of every Sabbath, beside the continual burnt offering, and his drink offering.” Num. 28: 9, 10.

I would imagine that you to have taught and thought that the sacrifices were relegated to those “Jewish feast days,” for the many times it appeared in our Quarterlies and other missionary literatures.

I say this to make what I believe to be a BIG point—the Passover.  Let’s here review one of your concepts of the festival of Passover:

Geoff: “Would you agree with me that at this point Jesus is instituting what we now call the Communion Service (along with the Ordinance of Humility/Foot Washing Service)?  Would you also agree with me that this is no longer the old Passover Service (Exodus 12) on the 14th day of the first month because now they have Lamb of God with them.  There may have been a lamb, but Luke doesn’t mention it in this new ordinance Jesus is setting up here.  He doesn’t say the lamb represents Him.  He says the bread represents Him (I’m just talking about here in this important context).  Now let’s say, they already ate the Passover lamb and now Jesus is setting up the Communion in verses 17 through 19.  If Jesus intended for them to continue the original Passover, just leaving out the lamb, then He would have to include that directive at this point.”

My answer: No, I cannot accept, using the Bible alone, that Christ instituted “the Communion Service.” I have searched all the gospel writers from Mathew thru John, and the word “communion” or the Greek “koinonia” from which it derives does not exist!  I am quite familiar with how the DA, pp. 652-653 has been misused to countermand the Bible, and have broadly contextualized this in my article “Rediscovering Passover”.  The word “communion” strangely enough does not mean a meal, but simply fellowship, such as “what fellowship (communion) is there with the temple of God and the temple of Baal?”  Whenever therefore, we attend church, or fellowship—where two are three agree together—there is communion.  Do a little history on this word, and how it became attached to, and replaced the Lord’s Supper, and you’ll discover much to your chagrin, that it is or Roman Catholic descent.

Paul used this word in three specific cases in the KJV, and there they are:

1Cor. 10:16 “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

Does the word “communion” here mean the Lord’s Supper?

2Cor. 6:14 “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?”

Does the word “communion” here mean the Lord’s Supper?

2Cor. 13:14 “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen.”

Does the word “communion” here mean the Lord’s Supper?

Here is the definition of the word “communion” which many have attached to the Lord’s Supper: Strong’s Greek #2842 “koinonia… AV-fellowship 12, communion 4, communication 1, distribution 1, contribution 1, to communicate 1; 20”

The Greek Lexicon tells us that this word is used 20 times in the entire Bible, and not even in one instance does it mean “eating bread and washing feet.”  Does this strike you as very odd?

Looking deeper, you asked: “Would you also agree with me that this is no longer the old Passover Service (Exodus 12) on the 14th day of the first month because now they have Lamb of God with them.”

I am sorry to disappoint you, but I cannot agree with our assumptions, and must here clarify something you might have overlooked in Luke 22:

“1 Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover… 7 Then came the dayof unleavened bread, when the Passover [lamb] must be killed… 14 And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him.” Luke 22: 1, 7, 14.

It is important to see the progression of information here.  We first started out with the approaching of Passover as it “drew nigh.”  Then we moved to “the day” of Passover, the 14th day of the 1st month—the day the lamb “must be killed.” Remember, you cannot “kill” the day, only the lamb, as they did.  We get closer yet, we are now at the very “hour” when the Passover meal which had been prepared all day long was to be eaten.  And right here Jesus became master of ceremony and declared:

“With desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer: 16 For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it [Passover] be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” Luke 22: 15, 16.

“19 And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the Passover. 20 Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve. 21 And as they did eat [the Passover meal/supper], he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.” Matt. 26: 19-21.

I would hope you notice that Christ and the disciples were verily eating the Passover supper, contrary to what many Adventist Bible students and scholars teach today.

He continues:

“26 And as they were eating [the Passover meal], Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. 27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; 28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.” Matt. 26: 26-29.

We see here that Christ and the disciples were eating the Passover meal, at which point he opened their understanding to a new dimension of Passover, one which will thenceforth be eaten without the lamb, for His (Y’shuah’s) body and blood were emblematized by the unleavened bread and the unleavened wine.  It is to this experience has tells us to look even to “the Kingdom of God” when He will eat Passover with us again, but in his absence he commissions us to do this “till he comes.”  This is why in the same chapter with the Last Passover Supper, Christ taught: “29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; 30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” Luke 22: 29-30

19 And He took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, this is My body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of Me.” Luke 22: 19.  When Christ spoke these words, there was never a notion of “communion” in His mouth, and we would cause serious injury to the revealed Scriptures to “add” (De 4:2!), this word where Inspiration said differently.  The only topic which was discussed among them was “PASSOVER,” and so they understood him, as well as all the early disciples understood Christ’s ordering them to keep the Passover in remembrance of His atoning death on our behalf, thus bringing the system of sacrifices to an end.

“There is no indication of the observance of the Easter festival in the New Testament, or in the writings of the apostolic Fathers. The first Christians continued to observe the Jewish festivals, though in a new spirit,as commemorations of events which those festivals had foreshadowed. Thus the Passover, with a new conception added to it, of Christ as the true Paschal Lamb and the first fruits from the dead, continued to be observed.” Encyclopedia Britannica 11th edition, p.828 (Italics and emphasis supplied).

Now, in light of these glaring historical facts, reflect on these words from your pen: “If Jesus intended for them to continue the original Passover, just leaving out the lamb, then He would have to include that directive at this point.”

You will find a lot of Adventist and Protestant authors agreeing with you, but they are at odds with sacred history and most of all the Bible.  I want to be in harmony with the Bible, how about you?

So abundant was this teaching that the Encyclopedia, further informs us:

“In the second century of our era there were many churches in Asia which kept the fourteenth day (Passover). They were called Quartodecimans, which means the keepers of the fourteenth day of the lunar month. Among the observers of the quartodeciman festival are counted Polycarp …it is (also) incontrovertibly clear that the quartodeciman Christians celebrated Passover. The name and the date of the festival are the same as in the Israelite calendar… The quartodeciman Christians commemorated only the Death of the Lord Jesus, and not his Resurrection.” The Encyclopedia Britannica, Passover.

The second Century is now well over a hundred years after the cross, not in Jerusalem, but in Asia, the region of Paul’s ministry, we still see the early church in biblical obedience, keeping the Passover!  Does this cause you to bristle?  Well, here’s what I know:  They were closer to Christ and the Apostles than any of us, and those “quartodeciman Christians,” became the forerunners of the people we greatly admire for preserving the Sabbath throughout the centuries—the Waldenses.  Read here for more on the life and teachings of Polycarp, that indomitable veteran of the Christian faith: SDA Bible Commentary Vol. 9, p. 362.  Polycarp kept the Passover and was ultimately roasted alive in a fire for not recanting this practice!

In light of all the above revelations, I want to recast a statement of yours: “So Communion is now in remembrance of Jesus, not Passover!  Communion is practiced after the cross; Passover, before.  And so in answer to your question, Jesus has already fulfilled the Passover!  He will not eat again with us until He eats with us in the Kingdom!”

I don’t believe you will still hold this view, if you’ve understood the above biblical and historical citations.  This I will allow you and the Holy Spirit to settle.  Remember, I don’t have a bone in this fight, I’m just seeking to be obedient to my King.  If by “fulfilled” you mean that Christ has fulfilled the antitypical Passover Lamb, yes, I agree with you, but be aware that the consummate fulfillment of Passover in scheduled by Christ for “the kingdom of God.”  This, I believe you can see clearly, do you?

Christ has extended the imagery of the Passover supper He had with his early disciples there and then, and forecasted it to the Kingdom of Glory” wherein his disciples, you and I, shall “eat and drink” our welcome-home Passover supper at his table in his kingdom!  What a glorious day that will be!  I know many would love to see the words Communion here, but unfortunately, Christ did not use that word, neither did any of the Synoptic Gospel writers.  I would encourage you to do an historical search on the Communion and the Eucharist, to see from whence they came.  This will be a very rewarding search for you.

Again, like you and many others in our church, I read Joe Crew’s book and was wearing his smoked screen lenses for quite some time until the scales fell off, and I saw as never before I had seen.  This is my testimony, and I have many emails to support it.  What I mean to say, my brother Geoff, I was not born into keeping feasts, and Pastor Marsden knows that I am a proselyte to the Advent message—I was not born with Sabbath keeping in my family.  I was the first to have made such a radical step, and have been a radical ever since then, having convinced five of my ten siblings to walk this Advent road with me, in obedience to the Bible.  What I did not stop doing thought, is growing in grace and in the knowledge of God’s truth, and so have graduated to seeing things from a different perspective on some themes.

I really wanted to make this one short, but I must apologize for its length as it is necessary:  Here you state, “I failed to find in Acts 18 and 20 where Paul observed the Feasts other than to seek an opportunity to reason with and win the Jews to convert them to following Jesus.”

Just think of Polycarp and the entire body of disciples in Asia, converted by Paul, and ask the question again. Your argument here is the same that Sunday keepers use when discussing the Sabbath in the New Testament. Why?  They see the Sabbath as a Jewish tradition.  For Adventists, we have accepted the Sabbath, but see the rest of the Feasts as “Jewish” customs, and this is very wrong headed.  There is too much on the table right now for me to crowd in more facts, but I’d encourage you to look beyond Joe Crews and Ron Du Preez, among others of like mind, and your eyes will be opened to follow the Lamb “wherever” He leads you in His word.

Let me give you a secret:  That which has given more momentum to the homosexual movement is the Christian world which proclaim that “the ceremonial law” was nailed to the cross!  Have you noticed that it’s the descendants of the Reformation who are leading the world, yea, bullying the world into accepting their abominable same-sex marriage!  A people who honor the Torah, will never lose their focus into thinking that YHWH has made allowance for this and other practices.

Enough said at this point.  Walk with the King and be a transforming blessing.

In His love,

Garrick

Geoff’s Response

Well My Dear Brother Garrick,
I am delighted to read and respond to your reply.  Unfortunately, I’m really involved this morning in the office.  Hopefully, I’ll be able to spare a few moments a little later to give a more comprehensive answer.
I appreciate your intention to edify and not brow beat.  I draw further counsel from Titus 3:9 which reminds us, “But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.”  I don’t consider our exchange foolish, striving, or unprofitable.  And as long as we keep it that way I believe it is healthy in order to “speak the same thing” (1 Corinthians 1:10).
I do appreciate your scholarship, sincerity and courtesy.  “But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.”  2 Timothy 2:23-26.
And so I do encourage you to “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.”  2 Timothy 4:2.
And also “These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.”  Titus 2:15.
Afterall, “Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.”  Proverbs 27:17.
That said, I will get back with you later.  In the mean time, please explain what’s going on in 1 Corinthians 10:16.
Finally, please give me your understanding of this message from the inspired pen:
“Christ did not contradict His own teaching. The unfermented wine that He provided for the wedding guests was a wholesome and refreshing drink. This is the wine that was used by our Saviour and His disciples in the first Communion. It is the wine that should always be used on the Communion table as a symbol of the Saviour’s blood. The sacramental service is designed to be soul-refreshing and life-giving. There is to be connected with it nothing that could minister to evil.—The Ministry of Healing, 333.
Blessed Sabbath to you,
*** Geoff ***
Dear Garrett,
I have come to cherish your responses because they push me to a much deeper level of study than I may have pursued independently.  I am a mere layman and no scholar, and at times too simplistic.  I’m stealing a few second to ponder a few things this topic has inspired after my long morning meeting at work (which comes as a relief from the comparatively mundane duties for which I am still grateful to be employed).
My thoughts race ahead to inquire whether you accept the biblical doctrine of the Three divine Persons of the Godhead – the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost?  Today is Frigg Day or Friday, a portion of the Sixth Day or Preparation Day.  Again, I have no problem with the pagan names any more than calling Daniel Belteshazzar, Hananiah Shadrach, Mishael Meshach, and Azariah Abednego.  Daniel 1:7.  And so I have no hesitance referring to the Trinity because the Father is fully God, the Son is fully God and the Holy Spirit is fully God and they are three distinguishable Personalities and Persons recorded in the Bible.  Don’t worry, I have not branched off into another subject here.
Sister White spoke authoritatively on such as the Godhead, Christmas, and Communion.  If she were uncertain on a matter she would say so or remain silent on a matter until God gave her light.  That way she did not have to reverse her position.  We are not to pick and choose which parts of the Testimonies to accept and reject.  It’s all or nothing.  We must accept the whole counsel or abandon them altogether.  Pitting Ellen White against Ellen White is not wise.  Pitting Ellen White against the Bible is unwarranted because I have found no teaching from the Spirit of Prophecy contrary to the Bible, otherwise I would have rejected the SOP a long time ago.  New light always agrees with old light, otherwise one or both are not light at all.
Something in Testimonies for the Church Volume 1, Page 235 comes to mind:
“This testimony was given to him [one Brother H]. But very few persons knew that I had a message for him. He rose in rebellion against it, and, like some others who have been reproved, took the position that persons had prejudiced my mind against his family, when the vision pointed out the same faults in them that I had repeatedly seen for ten years. He said that he believed the visions, but that I was influenced by others in writing them.
“What a conclusion! The Lord has a special work to perform through one of the acknowledged gifts, but suffers the message given to be adulterated before it reaches the person whom He wishes to correct! Of what use are the visions if persons regard them in this light? They put their own construction upon them, and feel at liberty to reject that portion which does not agree with their feelings.”
If we are at liberty to reject the portions of the Spirit of Prophecy that do not fit our worldview then it won’t be long before we reject portions of Scripture as well.
I’m not certain what it is to “bait hunt” but from context clues it doesn’t sound like something very nice.  So forgive me if that is what I’m doing.  As I better understand exactly what it is, may God grant me the grace to desist.
In Christian love and respect,
*** Geoff ***
Garrick’s Reply
Brother Geoff:
‘Tis almost Sabbath, and we are about to go into worship, but wanted to respond to this e-mail and set  your mind at ease: I do believe in “the Three divine Persons of the Godhead – the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost,” and hold them all to be Deity.
There are heathen things that we participate in, and as long as they are not challenging the Divine Code, then we are fine to be “users of this world’s goods.”  As you see, I have drawn the line squarely on the Torah, and if it’s not there, I will not have any concerns, but simply say, “let every man be persuaded in his own mind.”  So the nomenclature of the week does not bother me, for at the core, I am not a “Saturday” worshipper, but a keeper of the 7th Day.  There is a huge difference between the two, and the experience of the brethren in the Fiji islands attest to this.
It might surprise you that Sister White, much as I love and admire her, has had to “reverse her position,” on a few occasions.  I will share these at the appropriate time.  I don’t find it helpful in displaying her human weaknesses, except when our people try to make her infallible!  For example, she and James did not always see the “trinity,” and “the nature of Christ,” as the Church now teaches, this was a real growth for them.  The early Adventists were Arians, and there is an element of Arianism in our church today (not in the clergy necessarily, but there are individuals teaching that there is no such a thing as a Trinity–this is Catholic doctrine.)
As I said to you today in our phone conversation: I don’t have a problem dispensing with the words “Trinity” and “millennium,” for example, but still hold to the concept of three divine persons making up “the godhead”, and that there are 1000 years of Sabbatical rest to this earth, wherein no life exists but that of the Devil and his angels, till the thousand years be fulfilled.
 
The “all or nothing” approach to Sister White’s writings, I find unsettling, and you may want to examine that position more closely.  Let me simply state, we have not been given the whole truth on certain things, and it will be well to let your silence be eloquence in this arena.  You’ll have less to repent of, and less to be spiritually embarrassed about.  If some died in the wool Adventists knew that Ellen White authorized a Pagan (Masonic) Obelisk to be placed at her Husband’s grave, It might give them pause to wonder.  And more so, when they that such a symbol of Free Masonry also overshadows her grave, it might be too much for them to bear.  Again, I take the Bible as my final rule of faith and authority, and am not “ashamed” for “rightly” using it. 
 
When you get to know more about the work I do, it is never designed to “pit Ellen White against herself,” but to keep her in her place as inspired messenger and the Bible in its place as the greater light, and harmonize them both.  Just one visit to my Bible Study will illustrate this fact.  I have Jews and Gentiles who attend this online fellowship, and when they hear the writings of EGW used, they have grown to respect her. This in an age when there is a plethora of her detractors posting messages online.
This perspective of yours, in reversed: “If we are at liberty to reject the portions of the Spirit of Prophecy that do not fit our worldview then it won’t be long before we reject portions of Scripture as well.”
When we accept the Bible FIRST, we will then have no problem withe The Spirit of Prophecy.
More later.
Shabbat Shalom in Messiah,
Garrick

Geoff’s Reply:

My Dear Friend Garrick,
Sorry for misspelling your name last time.  Dialogue with you challenges me to dig deeper into God’s word.
I am glad we share the biblical doctrine of the Godhead.  I am also glad we both have no problem with employing extra-biblical Greek and pagan terminology in expression of the days of the week and months of the year.  I am most happy that we share confidence in the Bible.  I believe it is the word of God.
The Testimonies for the Church Volume 1, Page 235 quote I shared below is significant because there is a danger of deflecting or rejecting counsel because it applies better to “others.”  One of the reasons for the testimonies is for as many as possible to benefit from the divine counsel it contains.  It’s true that not everything directly applies.  The Bible is useful in personal application.  2 Timothy 3:16,17 says “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”  I believe all means all.
Now, the SOP is not the Bible, but far too often attitudes toward the Gift of Prophecy are preceded by the same dispositions toward the Bible.  Case in point, when Paul says “But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment” in 1 Corinthians 7:6, many find liberty to disregard the related counsel because it is from man and not from God.  Please notice Paul makes a similar statement in verse 25; “Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord…”
And so my question to you is whether this means whenever we hear such expressions in the Bible that means we are at liberty to “take it or leave it”?  I mean wouldn’t it be logical to conclude that anything spoken by permission or without the commandment of the Lord should not be obligatory?
Well, I invite you to continue reading where we left off.  “Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.” 1 Corinthians7:25.  This is crucial because the Bible says “all scripture” and ALL is ALL!  We are not allowed to pick and choose what was inspired and what was not.  It all carries God’s authority.  Paul either speaks “as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful” or he does not, in which case he would be lying.  He is required as a holy man of God to be accurate.  There’s no margin for error and this is one of the things that help me rely on God’s word the Bible.  I don’t know about you, but I prefer to do spiritual warfare with effective tools and weapons, and not unreliable (sometimes malfunctioning) arsenals and armor.
Likewise, I’ve found the Spirit of Prophecy to be “a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.”  2 Peter 1:19, 20.  That’s because I believe the same Holy Spirit inspired both.  While the the Testimonies are not the Bible, I can firmly say without apology that I have full confidence in this gift because I have full confidence in God who would not steer me wrong or deceive me.
Proverbs 4:18 says “But the path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day.”
Our pioneers grew in their understanding and rediscovery of unfolding truths.  Sister White was no exception.  I haven’t found any statement under inspiration she had to reverse.  Have you?
Consider the matter of pork eating you mentioned in our phone conversation.  I prefer to quote rather than paraphrase.  For the record, it was James White in 1850 who wrote regarding pork, “We do not, by any means, believe that the Bible teaches that its proper use, in the gospel dispensation, is sinful.”  Ellen White would later in 1858 say “If it is the duty of the church to abstain from swine’s flesh, God will discover it to more than two or three.”  Was that true?  Yes, it was very accurate because that is exactly what happened in precise fulfillment.
We already agree on the understanding of the bicycle prohibition and early Adventist Arianism.  But my sticking point is that Sister White never spoke anything under inspiration for which she had to apologize or reverse.  Not even when she spoke on the Third Person of the Godhead as God gave her better understanding.
And so trying to pit early Ellen White against latter Ellen White is futile because, while her understanding of what was given her under inspiration grew, God meant what He said through her.  Just as Peter didn’t initially understand initially the meaning of his vision (Acts 10:17, 19) he soon understood and was able to correctly communicate “God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean” (verse 28) and “Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: but in every nation he that feareth Him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with Him” (verses 34, 35).
And so what Ellen White says about Christmas is correct, authoritative and reliable.  So we are not allowed to discard any of these because they do not line up with our preference:
Now what about Jeremiah 10:1-5 makes you think this is a Christmas tree?
Your friend,
Geoff
Garrick’s Response:
Brother Geoff:
It is truly my delight in having this conversation, and trust that we can get back to some of the substantive themes in the Scriptures.
To your inquiry, I have dealt with this question before, and am attaching my response to it.  This is a general purpose response, but it is specific enough to address all your questions.  But after having read the attachment, if you have further discussion point on that subject, there’s more where that tame from.
Shalom in Messiah,
Garrick
Geoff’s Response
Thanks Garrick,
While your 12 page exchange with David P Rehm was interesting, it did not directly answer my specific questions.  When Ellen White does not specifically say “I was shown” does that mean we may ignore the counsel or not hold her responsible for teaching error or anything which contradicts the Bible?
On p. 9 of your letter is the sweeping defense “We must first of all be honest, honest with the Bible, honest with ourselves, and honest with the public at large… If on the other hand, we are honest enough to confess that in this or that particular area, she did not have light, and thus rendered the popular opinion of the times, one which she herself shred, it will be much better received. And for this the Bible is filled with examples (I will not here state them), but suffice to say that Jacob was wrong to have four wives (baby mothers), but in the end he became Israel…”
My friend, do you have any examples in the Bible or SOP of any prophet reversing what he said was true?  Please state them here, even a few,even one.  Moses sinned, David sinned, Ellen White sinned, but lying under inspiration is not one of them.
You went on to say “God values honesty, and the same with those who are ‘made in his image.’ When, on the other hand, there appears the slightest indication of dishonesty and cover-up, the floodgates of inquiry and research for more errors will have been opened, and this, my fried, does more ‘harm’ and no good.”  I am not concerned that people look for Ellen White’s flaws, but if she did not speak the truth at any time at all, I wish someone would uncover this error and deception at once so that I may discard her writings along with the other false prophets because making false statement under oath/under inspiration is definite grounds for immediate disqualification.  This is not infallibility, but in giving false testimony, when it comes to the Spirit of Prophesy, God leaves no margin for error!  That’s how important this matter is.  You see, it is a grave and wretched sin to switch sign posts to weary travelers on the road of life.
Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour’s landmark, which they of old time have set in thine inheritance, which thou shalt inherit in the land that the Lord thy God giveth thee to possess it.”  Deuteronomy 19:14.
“Cursed be he that removeth his neighbour’s landmark. And all the people shall say, Amen.”  Deuteronomy 27:17.
 
Some remove the landmarks; they violently take away flocks, and feed thereof.”  Job 24:2.
“Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set.”  Proverbs 22:28.
 
“Therefore hearken not ye to your prophets, nor to your diviners, nor to your dreamers, nor to your enchanters, nor to your sorcerers, which speak unto you, saying, Ye shall not serve the king of Babylon: for they prophesy a lie unto you, to remove you far from your land; and that I should drive you out, and ye should perish.”  Jeremiah 27:9, 10.
 
When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.”  Deuteronomy 18:22.
 
The prophet which prophesieth of peace, when the word of the prophet shall come to pass, then shall the prophet be known, that the Lord hath truly sent him.”  Jeremiah 28:9.
I think you get the picture.  It is a serious crime to switch signposts!  It is also a serious matter to disregard God’s prophets.
“And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.”  Acts 3:23.
God would not allow Ellen White to tell us one thing then tell us the opposite.
What do you say?
Sincerely,
*** Geoff ***
Garrick’s Reply
Greetings Brother Geoff:
Let me make a disclaimer here:  My ministry is not to instill doubt in the gift of prophecy in our church, nor is it to denigrate Ellen G. White.  And as can bee seen from the two testimonies I cited from my readers, my work actually restores confidence in the prophetic gift, and humanizes Ellen G. White.
Many SDA’s have been disillusioned that EGW was more than a human, and thereby make her infallible.  This is both wrong and misleading, doing injustice to her work and the gift of Inspiration resident in our midst.
I agree that the way Ellen White was presented to our formative minds made her a goddess, so to speak, and has created what I call “the cult of Ellen White.”  I was a member of that cult. There was a time in my life that when I went to church, I walked with my entire Ellen White library, and on a flick would quote, from memory, extensive paragraphs form her work.  The Holy Spirit has, over the years, taught me that I should make the Bible the foundation book for salvation–this was a radical change.  Today, I walk with the Bible and the Bible only, and have been 1000 times more effective in my high calling.  I do not denounce those who still carry an arm-full of Ellen White’s books to church, I just feel sorry for them, that they are limiting their ability to allow the HOly Spirit to lift them Higher than He has elevated Ellen White.
I made the above preamble, in an effort that you may see I have no vendetta to settle against Sister White.  I have not found even one person who can take credit that my work and approach to her writings has weakened their hold on the Advent message, or discredited the ministry of Ellen White. For example, I’m working with a brother, T. B. and will copy him on this e-mail as evidence, who has a Theology degree from, I believe Southern Adventist University, and had little appreciation for her writings.  Today, his views of her work has matured, and does not leave her to the scrapheaps, as so many from our schools of learning have done.  I believe if you should attend one of our Bible Studies, you’ll find a wide cross sect ion of people there who are not of our faith, and who upon hearing a citation form EGW’s writings find it inspiring and Heave-ward promoting.
You take a very hard-line stand in the following statement, which I believe can and will work to your injury:
“I am not concerned that people look for Ellen White’s flaws, but if she did not speak the truth at any time at all, I wish someone would uncover this error and deception at once so that I may discard her writings along with the other false prophets because making false statement under oath/under inspiration is definite grounds for immediate disqualification.  This is not infallibility, but in giving false testimony, when it comes to the Spirit of Prophesy, God leaves no margin for error!  That’s how important this matter is.”
Let me illustrate how dangerous this position of yours is, especially the one in red:

“Then I was pointed to some who are in the great error of believing that it is their duty to go to Old Jerusalem, and think they have a work to do there before the Lord comes. Such a view is calculated to take the mind and interest from the present work of the Lord, under the message of the third angel; for those who think that they are yet to go to Jerusalem will have their minds there, and their means will be withheld from the cause of present truth to get themselves and others there. I saw that such a mission would accomplish no real good, that it would take a long while to make a very few of the Jews believe even in the first advent of Christ, much more to believe in His second advent. I saw that Satan had greatly deceived some in this thing and that souls all around them in this land could be helped by them and led to keep the commandments of God, but they were leaving them to perish. I also saw that Old Jerusalem never would be built up; and that Satan was doing his utmost to lead the minds of the children of the Lord into these things now, in the gathering time, to keep [76] them from throwing their whole interest into the present work of the Lord, and to cause them to neglect the necessary preparation for the day of the Lord.”  Early Writings, pp. 75-76

Without doing any mental gymnastics, lets honestly examine the text in bold and red.  First of all there are millions of Jews today who accept the Messiah as their Saviour, Redeemer and King, yet EGW said “ it would take a long while to make a very few of the Jews believe even in the first advent of Christ, much more to believe in His second advent.”  This she said in 1851.  Is is true to the world in which we live today?
 
Secondly, “ I also saw that Old Jerusalem never would be built up.”   100-years later, Jerusalem became the capital of Israel, and today has been overwhelmingly “built up,” even while there is a standing prophecy declaring it “never” would be built up!  This is what I mean when I say we must be “honest.”  
 
On the point of pork eating, you will note that EGW told the people who pointed her to the anti-pork eating passages in the Bible, that “Satan was leading them…”, yet a few years later the Holy Spirit led her to the very same passages that “Satan led” the other believers some 5 years earlier!  Is this an honest position that she has not reversed her stand on any theological subject?  
 
Further, in that statement she said “God would teach his church, and would disclose it to more than one or two,” (paraphrase), yet the story and vision of the health message was given only to her–”one” person.  
 
On the matter of the pagan tree, you hold that it is of divine sanction, so my simple question is this:  Please provide biblical and historical support for the Christmas tree in our homes and in the Church of God.
 
I notice that our conversation has shifted to Christmas and the defense of Ellen White, and that was not the objective, but to discover “meat in due season,” such as the relevance of God’s Festivals to Christians today.
 
Shalom in Messiah,
 
Garrick
 
PS:  I have given several examples of how prophets have blundered, even theologically.  And the most striking I can think of is the one of the Old Prophet, vs. The Man of God, also called the young prophet.  Notice that one prophet caused another prophet to be misled?

 

***************

Geoff’s Response
Brother Garrick,
Ellen White’s fallibility is a “strawman argument” the can be used as a smokescreen to avoid addressing matters we must come to grips with, because I and no one else I’ve heard claims she was perfect and without shortcomings.  When it comes to prophecy, it’s all or nothing, pass or fail.  Take it or leave it alone!  I choose to accept what God has provided through the prophet.  Should we totally disregard or toss out as obsolete the light God shared through her because it disagrees with our worldview and therefore she must have been mistaken, as we find things that seem to disagree or contradict earlier statements? Or should we, as with the Bible, humbly and cautiously proceed with the mindset that our understanding may be flawed? Most, if not all apparent Bible and SOP inconsistencies turn out to be my flawed understanding.  Once I am corrected everything harmonizes.  Has this been your experience?
I haven’t forgotten the original topic at all.  I hope you are considering the outstanding and unanswered questions like:
  1. What should we do with SOP and Bible passages that seem to conflict?  Should we discard or study them for clarity and then wait for more light before coming to our own conclusions?  Should we throw out those 17 statements/documents/messages on Christmas just because you think Jeremiah 10:1-5 refers to the a Christmas tree (and I’m still waiting for what makes you link the palm tree it to pine tree besides that they both start with a “p” and have four letters).
  2. What “handwriting of ordinances” was blotted out and nailed to the cross?
  3. Is that The Ministry of Healing, 333 quote on the first Communion showing Christ instituting a new observance or perpetuating the old observance of Passover?  See Matthew 26:28, Mark 14:24, Luke 22:20, 1 Corinthians 11:25, 2 Corinthians 3:6 and Hebrews 9:15.
  4. Talk about Catholic interference, the NIV is most suspect (see these 16 missing verse – Matthew 17:21, Matthew 18:11, Matthew 23:14, Mark 7:16, Mark 9:44, Mark 9:46, Mark 11:26, Mark 15:28, Luke 17:36, John 5:4, Acts 8:37, Acts 15:34, Acts 24:7, Acts 28:29, Romans 16:24 and 1 John 5:7).  Now, what is this Communion, or Participation, or Sharing In, or Fellowship In, or Partaking Of, or Fellowship Of, or Joint-Participation?
  5. Please give me even one example of a prophet who reversed his prophecy (besides conditional prophecies like that of Jonah in Jonah 3:4 and Isaiah in Isaiah 38:1) in the Bible or in the SOP.  Where did Ellen White apologetically or unapologetically reversed an unconditional prophecy?

Here’s what I found of that Early Writing, p. 75, 76 example you provided (it’s quite interesting reading – please not the fuller context and the appendix note you did not include:

The Lord has shown me that the message of the third angel must go, and be proclaimed to the scattered children of the Lord, but it must not be hung on time. I saw that some were getting a false excitement, arising from preaching time; but the third angel’s message is stronger than time can be. I saw that this message can stand on its own foundation and needs not time to strengthen it; and that it will go in mighty power, and do its work, and will be cut short in righteousness.
Then I was pointed to some who are in the great error of believing that it is their duty to go to Old Jerusalem, [see Appendix. I have included this Appendix below] and think they have a work to do there before the Lord comes. Such a view is calculated to take the mind and interest from the present work of the Lord, under the message of the third angel; for those who think that they are yet to go to Jerusalem will have their minds there, and their means will be withheld from the cause of present truth to get themselves and others there. I saw that such a mission would accomplish no real good, that it would take a long while to make a very few of the Jews believe even in the first advent of Christ, much more to believe in His second advent. I saw that Satan had greatly deceived some in this thing and that souls all around them in this land could be helped by them and led to keep the commandments of God, but they were leaving them to perish. I also saw that Old Jerusalem never would be built up; and that Satan was doing his utmost to lead the minds of the children of the Lord into these things now, in the gathering time, to keep them from throwing their whole interest into the present work of the Lord, and to cause them to neglect the necessary preparation for the day of the Lord.
*****
Dear Reader,
A sense of duty to my brethren and sisters and a desire that the blood of souls might not be found on my garments have governed me in writing this little work. I am aware of the unbelief that exists in the minds of the multitude relative to visions, also that many who profess to be looking for Christ and teach that we are in the “last days” call them all of Satan. I expect much opposition from such, and had I not felt that the Lord required it of me, I should not have made my views thus public, as they will probably call forth the hatred and derision of some. But I fear God more than man.
When the Lord first gave me messages to deliver to His people, it was hard for me to declare them, and I often softened them down and made them as mild as possible for fear of grieving some. It was a great trial to declare the messages as the Lord gave them to me. I did not realize that I was so unfaithful and did not see the sin and danger of such a course until in vision I was taken into the presence of Jesus. He looked upon me with a frown and turned His face from me. It is not possible to describe the terror and agony I then felt. I fell upon my face before Him, but had no power to utter a word. Oh, how I longed to be covered and hid from that dreadful frown! Then could I realize, in some degree, what the feeling of the lost will be when they cry, “Mountains and rocks, fall on us, and hide us from the face of Him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb.”
Presently an angel bade me rise, and the sight that met my eyes can hardly be described. A company was presented before me whose hair and garments were torn and whose countenances were the very picture of despair and horror. They came close to me and took their garments and rubbed them on mine. I looked upon my garments and saw that they were stained with blood, and that blood was eating holes in them. Again I fell like one dead at the feet of my accompanying angel. I could not plead one excuse. My tongue refused all utterance, and I longed to be away from such a holy place. Again the angel stood me upon my feet and said, “This is not your case now, but this scene has passed before you to let you know what your situation must be if you neglect to declare to others what the Lord has revealed to you. But if you are faithful to the end, you shall eat of the tree of life and shall drink of the river of the water of life. You will have to suffer much, but the grace of God is sufficient.” I then felt willing to do all that the Lord might require me to do that I might have His approbation and not feel His dreadful frown.
I have frequently been falsely charged with teaching views peculiar to Spiritualism. But before the editor of the Day-Star [see Appendix.  I have included this Appendix below] ran into that delusion, the Lord gave me a view of the sad and desolating effects that would be produced upon the flock by him and others in teaching the spiritual views. I have often seen the lovely Jesus, that He is a person. I asked Him if His Father was a person and had a form like Himself. Said Jesus, “I am in the express image of My Father’s person.”
I have often seen that the spiritual view took away all the glory of heaven, and that in many minds the throne of David and the lovely person of Jesus have been burned up in the fire of Spiritualism. I have seen that some who have been deceived and led into this error will be brought out into the light of truth, but it will be almost impossible for them to get entirely rid of he deceptive power of Spiritualism. Such should make thorough work in confessing their errors and leaving them forever.
I recommend to you, dear reader, the Word of God as the rule of your faith and practice. By that Word we are to be judged. God has, in that Word, promised to give visions in the “last days”; not for a new rule of faith, but for the comfort of His people, and to correct those who err from Bible truth. Thus God dealt with Peter when He was about to send him to preach to the Gentiles. (Acts 10.).
To those who may circulate this little work, I would say that it is designed for the sincere only and not for those who would ridicule the things of the Spirit of God.
*****
Here are the two Appendices:
Page 75: Duty to go to Old Jerusalem.—Mrs. White refers to erroneous views then held by a very few. The next year, in the The Review and Herald, October 7, 1851, James White writes of “the distracting, unprofitable views relative to old Jerusalem and the Jews, etc., that are afloat at the present time,” and of “the strange notions that some have run into, that the saints have yet to go to old Jerusalem. Etc., etc.”
Page 77: Editor of the Day-Star.—Enoch Jacobs lived in Cincinnati, Ohio, and published the Day-Star, one of the early journals proclaiming the second advent of Christ. It was to Enoch Jacobs that Ellen Harmon in December, 1845, sent an account of her first vision, hoping to stabilize him. She had observed that he was wavering in his confidence in God’s leadership in the Advent experience. It was in the Day-Star that the editor published Mrs. White’s first vision, in the issue of January 24, 1846. In a special number of his journal, the Day-Star Extra, February 7, 1846, the memorable article concerning the heavenly sanctuary and its cleansing, prepared by Hiram Edson, Dr. Hahn, and O. R. L. Crozier, was published. It set forth the scripture teaching relative to the ministry of Christ in the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary beginning October 22, 1844. In this journal also on March 14, 1846, a second communication from Ellen Harmon’s pen was published. (see Early Writings, 32-35.) Reference in the paragraph under discussion is to later views held by Mr. Jacobs and the spiritualistic delusions he espoused.
Now, in fuller context and even before when I read your version, I saw no contradiction.  Old Jerusalem would never be built up and it still isn’t today.  Just look at the pictures (BTW, that dome is a misk, not a synagogue) and also take note of what it says in Wikipedia:
  1. Jerusalem, located on a plateau in the Judean Mountains between the Mediterranean and the Dead Sea, is one of the oldest cities in the world. It is considered holy to the three major Abrahamic religions—Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Wikipedia
Modern Jerusalem is not the Old Jerusalem, but a melting pot of three major religions.  It will not be restored until the New Jerusalem.  Sister White was accurate.  I’ll continue to study this interesting topic.
Until next time, I hope to see some of my outstanding questions addressed.
Sincerely,
*** Geoff ***
Garrick’s Reply
Brother Geoff:
I’m smiling and you can’t see that.  I will answer your questions, which I thought I had answered in previous mails, but will go back and address them individually again.
Without giving a full breast of EW pp. 75-76, you first need to know that the appendix was not added by EGW, and so is not honest to “add” to the SOP something the Spirit had not endorsed.  I find that most people who deal with this subject are tunnel visioned, in that they seek to only answer one part of the question–”old Jerusalem”, devoid of the next, “conversion of the Jews.”  I am thinking of this line: “I saw that such a mission would accomplish no real good, that it would take a long while to make a very few of the Jews believe even in the first advent of Christ, much more to believe in His second advent.”
How many Jews have accept Christ since that prophetic pronouncement?  and How long has it taken?  Has the conversion of today’s Jews accomplished any “real good” or not?  The GC has written a book entitled “The Gathering Call,” find it at the white estate, and it has taken 17-pages of apologetics to explain two paragraphs of plain English, and they only in those 17 pages dealt with the “Jerusalem” component of the question.  I find this troubling, to say the least.
Here is something else:  the notion of “Old Jerusalem” which we today call east Jerusalem did not exist in 1848, it was just Jerusalem.  Since 1948, when the Jews reoccupied Israel, there was a war between the Arabs and the Jews, and Israel has annexed East Jerusalem to itself when they took the West Bank.  Which part of “Old Jerusalem” has not been “built up” as compared with the 1848 condition of that city?  I have documents from the Israeli Planning and Zoning department which paint a far different picture.  Now we can stick our heads in the proverbial sand and say “Old Jerusalem has not been built up, just as Sister White predicted,” in spite of all the evidences around us, or simply not contest the issue, but express we do not understand what she meant.  I personally cannot explain what she meant by “never,” because the evidence on the ground teaches differently.  Again, on this point, my purpose is not to discredit EGW, which you think I’m after.  My aim is that we need to come honest, and don’t use 17-pages to explain one paragraph, that does not smell good, at least to me.
There is another notion we have come up with, and this is the “conditional prophecies of EGW.”  I will examine the case of the conference in 1856, in which she categorically stated that some people present there would “not taste death” while others would “perish in the  seven last plagues,” and still others becoming “food for worms.”  All of these individuals have died, and our leaders have developed the terminology “conditional,” yet EGW never gave any conditional clause in that entire chapter of her writings. It was an absolute fact that an angel shew her these things.
I will tell you this:  “ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of God,” and I hold them dearly. I will swear on the veracity and authenticity of the Scriptures any day, and on no other book.  As with the Bible so with Ellen White, thee are things said which are “difficult to be understood,” but when it takes 17-pages to explain one paragraph, it believe that is cause for caution, especially when that explanation is form a source some 100 years removed form the original author, and when reality speaks a different message.
I do have my assignments from you, and later will address them individually.
Shalom in Messiah,
Garrick

**************

Geoff’s Reply

Glad I could bring a smile to your face, Garrick,
I look forward to your responses.  Personally and actually, I long to move beyond syntax and semantics and considering some of the most incredible revelations that have impacted and greatly improved my life and helped me avoid mistakes and pitfalls.  In deed, I don’t know where I would be without the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy.  I don’t think most really appreciate their value.
“I said further: As the word of God is walled in with these books and pamphlets, so has God walled you in with reproofs, counsel, warnings, and encouragements. Here you are crying before God, in the anguish of your souls, for more light. I am authorized from God to tell you that not another ray of light through the Testimonies will shine upon your pathway until you make a practical use of the light already given. The Lord has walled you about with light; but you have not appreciated the light; you have trampled upon it. While some have despised the light, others have neglected it, or followed it but indifferently. A few have set their hearts to obey the light which God has been pleased to give them.”  Testimonies for the Church Volume 2, Page 606.
*** Geoff ***
Garrick’s Response

Brother Geoff, I reviewed our discussion thread and noted that I have furnished answers to your concerns, and shall copy and paste them, in this e-mail, as well as answer the new questions you’ve submitted.

  1. What should we do with SOP and Bible passages that seem to conflict?  Should we discard or study them for clarity and then wait for more light before coming to our own conclusions?  Should we throw out those 17 statements/documents/messages on Christmas just because you think Jeremiah 10:1-5 refers to the a Christmas tree (and I’m still waiting for what makes you link the palm tree it to pine tree besides that they both start with a “p” and have four letters).
  2. This is a new slant to an old Question:

i.      SOP and Bible Statements which seem to conflict:

ii.      Admit that there is an apparent conflict

iii.      Examine the context closely for clues

iv.      Recognize that the conflict might be caused from our own biases and lack of background information

v.      Recognize that our religious upbringing (biases) can influence our perception of truth

vi.      Then look throughout the Scriptures and sacred history for harmony.

For example: “Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.” Jude 1: 9

This passage does not explicitly use the word “resurrection,” but the context shows that “the body of Moses,” was the subject of dispute.  Given that Moses is known to have “died” (Deut. 34: 5), and some 1500 years later we see him on the mount of Transfiguration with Christ (Matt. 17: 4), evidences that Moses was indeed “resurrected” by Michael—(Y’shuah the life-giver).  There is much more which could be said here, but the message should be clear.  It did not take 17-pages to establish this harmony.

Christmas Tree et-al:  You ask: “Should we throw out those 17 statements/documents/messages on Christmas just because you think Jeremiah 10:1-5 refers to the a Christmas tree…?

Answer Cont:  Let’s examine the Scriptures and Sacred history to establish the origins of Christmas and the tree (vi).  If in that exercise you find that the Christmas tree (grove worship) and the Christmas festival (Tammuz worship) were invented by YHWH, and sanctioned by the Apostles, then we may keep both the Tree and the day in freedom of conscience.  If, on the other hand, both the Scriptures and sacred history inform us that grove (tree) worship (1 Ki. 18: 19), and Tammuz worship (Ezek. 8:14), also known as “sun worship,” are summarily condemned in the Scriptures, then we are obliged to be obedient to the testimony of the Bible.  My research has shown me that Tammuz was the son on Nimrod (Baal), the father of Babylon, and all of the associated worship strains from that sector; I have also seen anti-YHWH, methods employed in these “heathen” institutions, and the Bible is clear that there is no communion with the Temple of God and the Temple of Baal.  In obedience to the Holy Bible, I am obliged to dispense with the worship of “heathen deities,” masquerading as YHWH.

Closely associated with this “heathen worship” of Christmas, is the festival of Astarte (Easter), the Queen of Heaven, to whom the pagans made “cakes” (Jer. 7:18), which we today know as “Hot Cross Buns.”  If you’re a Jamaican, you can easily relate to this, because at Easter that is the special “bun eating season”.  Our bun-eating tradition in Jamaica comes courtesy of the worship of the Queen of Heaven.  Hence, both Christmas and Easter are from the same source—Tammuz, leaving people wailing over his death, in a season now known as “Lent.”  I believe you can fill in the blanks by now, that Christmas is an institution from the pit of Hell, and there is no way on earth the Church of God can have a Christmas that heaven can approve of.  Truly, in our ignorance our Father winks, but his intention is to teach us the truth, for those who offer worship to Him, do so “in spirit and in TRUTH.”

Do you think we can worship YHWH on a heathen altar?  If that were the case Elijah would have done so.  But demonstrating that God cannot be worshipped on heathen altars (mixing the sacred with the profane), he erected an altar in obedience with the Torah and offered his worship.  There’s a whole lot left unsaid here, but I’m sure the Holy Spirit is alive in your heart and mine, and will lead you to a fuller comprehension of these things.

  1. What “handwriting of ordinances” was blotted out and nailed to the cross? I suppose you are here referring to Col. 2: 14-16.
  2. The problem here is with the reader, and not with Paul.  It is quite easy to see that Paul was not calling one part of YHWH’s laws “ordinances”—ceremonial, and the other part “the law”—moral, as most Christians today do.  I have established that this type of division of the Torah is foreign to the Scriptures.  But without taking much time, let’s examine the context for clues (iii), and search the Scriptures for harmony (vi).
  3. Paul starts out with this warning, beware lest anyone “beguile you with enticing words,” (Col 2:4), and instructs them to be “Rooted and built up in him [Christ], and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.” Col. 2: 7.  It is important to find out what have they been taught of Paul.  Did he teach them to keep the holy festivals (1 Cor. 5: 7, 9)? Did he teach them to ignore those Jewish feasts because they are a part of the ceremonial law which has been nailed to the Cross?  The answer will be self-evident shortly.
  4. “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” Col. 2: 8.  Paul here warns the new church to be on guard against the vain philosophers, the vain deceivers, who engender doctrines “after the rudiments of the world and not after Christ.”  Most people who are antagonistic to God’s Holy Festivals, do not take time to read this verse or ask the question, is there a part of God’s law which is “after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ?”  The correct answer here is no, and so the context shows that Paul was not attacking God’s law, he was attacking the theology of “vain philosophers” who teach doctrines which have not been taught by the Apostles, or “after Christ.”
  5. “In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ.” Col. 2: 11.  Paul is here showing that the “circumcision of Christ”—was the greater object of the “circumcision of the foreskin”—the new heart circumcision we have in Messiah, which he shows opens with our baptismal commitment to following Christ as savior and Lord.
  6. He continued to develop this thought, announcing: “13And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.” Col 2: 13, 14.  Speaking to a purely “Gentile audience,” his being “the Apostle to the Gentiles,” Paul spoke of “the uncircumcision of your flesh,” because they were uncircumcised from birth, being Gentiles, and as such were “dead in their sins,” but forgiven when Christ circumcised their hearts in the new-birth experience.  Having now obtained that cardio-circumcision, they were to continue growing in Christ, and not be deceived by vain philosophers, “after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ?”
  7. Now we come to verse-14, the one of the so-called ceremonial law.  So we must now ask the question, which part of God’s Law, declared to be “holy, just and good,” (Rom. 7:12), was intended to be “against us?”  The moral, ceremonial, civil, Noah ide, health, etc.  (I include all these components of the Torah to satisfy the Adventist version of the Law, knowing fully well that the Bible nowhere makes room for these divisions, but that’s another discussion.) Let’s see this verses from other translations to see how the literal Greek was intended:
  • English Standard Version
    by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.
  • New American Standard Bible 
    having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.
  • King James Bible
    Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
  • Holman Christian Standard Bible
    He erased the certificate of debt, with its obligations, that was against us and opposed to us, and has taken it out of the way by nailing it to the cross.
  • International Standard Version
    having erased the charges that were brought against us, along with their obligations that were hostile to us. He took those charges away when he nailed them to the cross.
  • NET Bible
    He has destroyed what was against us, a certificate of indebtedness expressed in decrees opposed to us. He has taken it away by nailing it to the cross.
  • Aramaic Bible in Plain English
    And he has blotted out by his authority the bill of our debts which was adverse to us and he took it from the midst and nailed it to his cross.
  • GOD’S WORD® Translation
    He did this by erasing the charges that were brought against us by the written laws God had established. He took the charges away by nailing them to the cross.
  • Jubilee Bible 2000
    blotting out the bill of the decrees that was against us, which was contrary to us and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross {Gr. stauro – stake},

In short:  Christ removed the record (charges, condemnation, guilt, debt) of our sins when the was nailed to the Cross.  He did not “nail the law” to his cross, only our transgressions—our sins.  I can hear the words of a familiar song—“They were nailed to the cross, nailed to the Cross, O how much he was willing to bear, with what anguish and loss, Jesus went to the Cross, and He carried my sins with Him there.”  (This is a paraphrase from one of our Hymnal songs.).  When you understand more fully the work of the atoning sacrifice, you realize that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins, and Christ’s atoning blood necessarily had to have carried our sins to the Cross.  This is an imagery from the Sanctuary. So, to repeat, Christ did not take his holy law and nailed it to the Cross, but he took our sins, mingled with His blood, and nailed the record (testimony) of our sins there.

  1. Is that The Ministry of Healing, 333 quote on the first Communion showing Christ instituting a new observance or perpetuating the old observance of Passover?  See Matthew 26:28, Mark 14:24, Luke 22:20, 1 Corinthians 11:25, 2 Corinthians 3:6 and Hebrews 9:15.
  2. Please re-read my response on  Friday, May 16, 2014 11:40 AM: I have answered this item in great detail there.  I provide adequate information that “communion” as a feast is foreign to the practices of early Church, they only knew Passover.
  3. Talk about Catholic interference, the NIV is most suspect (see these 16 missing verse – Matthew 17:21, Matthew 18:11, Matthew 23:14, Mark 7:16, Mark 9:44, Mark 9:46, Mark 11:26, Mark 15:28, Luke 17:36, John 5:4, Acts 8:37, Acts 15:34, Acts 24:7, Acts 28:29, Romans 16:24 and 1 John 5:7).  Now, what is this Communion, or Participation, or Sharing In, or Fellowship In, or Partaking Of, or Fellowship Of, or Joint-Participation?
  4. Please re-read my response on Friday, May 16, 2014 11:40 AM: I have answered this item in great detail there.
  5. I did not rest my conclusions on the testimony of the NIV, but argued that all those translations had a dog in this theological fight, so to speak, and they did not, even in one instance, render the word “communion” as a sacred feast among Christians.  This is a Catholic interference.
  6. Please give me even one example of a prophet who reversed his prophecy (besides conditional prophecies like that of Jonah in Jonah 3:4 and Isaiah in Isaiah 38:1) in the Bible or in the SOP.  Where did Ellen White apologetically or unapologetically reversed an unconditional prophecy?
  7. I know of no prophet who has “reversed his prophecy,” conditional or not.  But the root of your question is deeper, and that is whether or not Ellen White has reversed herself on any theological precept, and to that I shall answer below:
  8. Here is Ellen White in 1856, reporting on a vision she had in company of many people: “I was shown the company present at the Conference, Said the angel: “Some food for worms, some subjects of the seven last plagues, some will be alive and remain upon the earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus.” Ellen G. White, 1 Testimonies, p. 131-132. May 27, 1856.
  9. I will not make this reply longer by quoting the entire chapter, that’s for you to do in your research.  But from my reading there is nothing “conditional” about this prophetic vision.  What I find most eye-opening is the simple fact that all those who were “present,” have died, and essentially became “food for worms.”  The seven last plagues have not yet fallen, Christ has not yet come, but the vision holds that some “some will be alive andremain upon the earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus.”  The bottom line is clear, they are all dead today and Christ has not yet come.  I would be more than happy for you to show me the “condition” in that prophecy, which was not met and thereby altered this prediction with angelic support.
  10. Where does Sister White provide clarity (an Appendix of sorts) to this early work of her ministry?  I have seen much writing from our apologists, but nothing from her pen.
  11. Look at this statement: “The colored people should not urge that they be placed on an equality with white people. The relation of the two races has been a matter hard to deal with, and I fear that it will ever remain a most perplexing problem. So far as possible, everything that would stir up the race prejudice of the white people should be avoided.” 9T, p. 214.  Is this the cause for the Black and White conferences in our church, even till today?
  12. “In reply to inquiries regarding the advisability of intermarriage between Christian young people of the white and black races, I will say that in my earlier experience this question was brought before me, and the light given me of the Lord was that this step should not be taken; for it is sure to create controversy and confusion. I have always had the same counsel to give. No encouragement to marriages of this character should be given among our people. Let the colored brother enter into marriage with a colored sister who is worthy, one who loves God, and keeps His commandments. Let the white sister who contemplates uniting in marriage with the colored brother refuse to take this step, for the Lord is not leading in this direction. Time is too precious to be lost in controversy that will arise over this matter. Let not questions of this kind be permitted to call our ministers from their work. The taking of such a step will create confusion and hindrance. It will not be for the advancement of the work or for the glory of God”.–Letter 36, 1912. (Selected Messages, Book 2, page 344, paragraphs 1,2).
  13. I will allow the emphasis to dictate my questions.  Has this position been reversed by her since 1912?
  14. “You have no license from God to exclude the colored people from places of worship. Treat them as Christ’s property, which they are, just as much as yourselves. They should hold membership in the church with the white brethren. Every effort should be made to wipe out the terrible wrong [slavery] which has been done them. At the same time we must not carry things to extremes and run into fanaticism on this question. Some would think it right to throw down every partition wall and intermarry with the colored people, but this is not the right thing to teach or practice.” (The Southern Work, P. 15)
  15. What does this mean?  Can we now violate this directive against SOP solemn counsel?
  16. On the Question of Jerusalem’s having been built up, we must simply consult the The Planning Zoning Department of the State of Israel, to confirm this, and they will be happy to let you know that there has been much building up.  Fruther, there are millions of Jews who have accepted both the First and Second advent of Christ.  Do you know any?  As I’ve stated yesterday, in 1848 there was no notion of “Old Jerusalem” in East and West segments as we have since 1948. Jerusalem rises and falls as a whole, not a part of Jerusalem, and that was not the ground of the prophecy which states that it shall “never” be built up again.
  17. As I stated, my objective is to go beyond these nebulous points, as I  have never lead anyone from belief in Ellen White’s writings, and will not venture to attempt at that here.  I believe there are depths of truths available to us in God’s word today which were unfamiliar to Ellen White in her days and that we must improve the light which shines upon us today as they improved that which fell on them in their day.

Have a blessed Sabbath,

Walk with the King and be a transforming blessing.

In His service,

Garrick

*************************

Geoff’s Reply

My Dear Brother,
We must talk about honesty in my next correspondence.  Stay tuned.
Sincerely,
*** Geoff ***
The Main Response on “honesty” will follow next.  Until then,  “stay tuned.”

2 thoughts on “Bible Discussions on SDA Doctrines (The Law and the Prophets)

  1. Brother Geoff:

    Sabbath greetings to all. I have read the most recent comments and am pained in many ways, for at the end of the day, the inspiration of the Bible is not under attack, but you have established some guidelines “against” which to appraise a true prophet, and I helped you to see that when strictly applied many of the prophets of the Bible would be condemned, including our very own, Sister White.

    Ellen Whit is not under attack either, only that you feel she was moved of God (YHWH) to instruct the body of believers to install a Christmas tree into the Church. And while you excuse Elijah’s doctrinal error for not only running away from God’s call and from Jezebel’s wrath, you would equally apologise for his doctrinal failure in believing and teaching that he was the only one left as a true worshiper of YHWH in Israel, being completely ignorant of the 7000 undefiled ones.

    With respect to the Law, you’ve reduced it to the ten commandments without going beyond the limitations of the English Language, so see the Hebrew or Greek original meanings of various words, phrases and expressions used in the Scriptures. For example, you privately apply this principle:

    “And thou shalt put the mercy seat above upon the ark; and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee.” Exodus 25:21.
    While the covenant with all the other laws and statutes supporting the 10 commandments was placed in the side of the ark”
    “Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.” Deuteronomy 31:26.

    Here you are establishing the superiority of of “10 commandments” being “in” the ark to the inferiority of “the book of the law” which is in the side or on the outside of the ark. You do not simultaneously realize that your construction on this inspired passage is toing injury to the very throne of God, the Mercy Seat, which is above, or on the outside of the ark! By the methods of your reasoning, you make the Law more holy than the mercy seat, the very–throne of YHWH. Think of this logic closely, and you will see the total flaw it carries. Most of all, you totally ignore the fact that the the book of the law is in the “Most Holy place” of the Sanctuary. The geographics of the book of the law, in relation to the ark is meaningless, else the mercy seat is just is transient. We cannot have it both ways, we must walk the straight path of consistency.

    I have read in others of your correspondences and wondered in amazement that you would suggest that your questions on Col. 2: 14 have been sidestepped, yet, I can only wonder if you’ve seen the direct responses submitted to your questions on at least two separate occasions. In other words, I am not sure that you’ve read all the e-mails in this thread, for your questions have been adequately answered. Let me quote from one (this is also at the blog):

    What “handwriting of ordinances” was blotted out and nailed to the cross? I suppose you are here referring to Col. 2: 14-16.
    The problem here is with the reader, and not with Paul. It is quite easy to see that Paul was not calling one part of YHWH’s laws “ordinances”—ceremonial, and the other part “the law”—moral, as most Christians today do. I have established that this type of division of the Torah is foreign to the Scriptures. But without taking much time, let’s examine the context for clues (iii), and search the Scriptures for harmony (vi).
    Paul starts out with this warning, beware lest anyone “beguile you with enticing words,” (Col 2:4), and instructs them to be “Rooted and built up in him [Christ], and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.” Col. 2: 7. It is important to find out what have they been taught of Paul. Did he teach them to keep the holy festivals (1 Cor. 5: 7, 9)? Did he teach them to ignore those Jewish feasts because they are a part of the ceremonial law which has been nailed to the Cross? The answer will be self-evident shortly.
    “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” Col. 2: 8. Paul here warns the new church to be on guard against the vain philosophers, the vain deceivers, who engender doctrines “after the rudiments of the world and not after Christ.” Most people who are antagonistic to God’s Holy Festivals, do not take time to read this verse or ask the question, is there a part of God’s law which is “after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ?” The correct answer here is no, and so the context shows that Paul was not attacking God’s law, he was attacking the theology of “vain philosophers” who teach doctrines which have not been taught by the Apostles, or “after Christ.”
    “In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ.” Col. 2: 11. Paul is here showing that the “circumcision of Christ”—was the greater object of the “circumcision of the foreskin”—the new heart circumcision we have in Messiah, which he shows opens with our baptismal commitment to following Christ as savior and Lord.
    He continued to develop this thought, announcing: “13And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.” Col 2: 13, 14. Speaking to a purely “Gentile audience,” his being “the Apostle to the Gentiles,” Paul spoke of “the uncircumcision of your flesh,” because they were uncircumcised from birth, being Gentiles, and as such were “dead in their sins,” but forgiven when Christ circumcised their hearts in the new-birth experience. Having now obtained that cardio-circumcision, they were to continue growing in Christ, and not be deceived by vain philosophers, “after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ?”
    Now we come to verse-14, the one of the so-called ceremonial law. So we must now ask the question, which part of God’s Law, declared to be “holy, just and good,” (Rom. 7:12), was intended to be “against us?” The moral, ceremonial, civil, Noah ide, health, etc. (I include all these components of the Torah to satisfy the Adventist version of the Law, knowing fully well that the Bible nowhere makes room for these divisions, but that’s another discussion.) Let’s see this verses from other translations to see how the literal Greek was intended:
    English Standard Version
    by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.
    New American Standard Bible
    having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.
    King James Bible
    Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
    Holman Christian Standard Bible
    He erased the certificate of debt, with its obligations, that was against us and opposed to us, and has taken it out of the way by nailing it to the cross.
    International Standard Version
    having erased the charges that were brought against us, along with their obligations that were hostile to us. He took those charges away when he nailed them to the cross.
    NET Bible
    He has destroyed what was against us, a certificate of indebtedness expressed in decrees opposed to us. He has taken it away by nailing it to the cross.
    Aramaic Bible in Plain English
    And he has blotted out by his authority the bill of our debts which was adverse to us and he took it from the midst and nailed it to his cross.
    GOD’S WORD® Translation
    He did this by erasing the charges that were brought against us by the written laws God had established. He took the charges away by nailing them to the cross.
    Jubilee Bible 2000
    blotting out the bill of the decrees that was against us, which was contrary to us and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross {Gr. stauro – stake},
    In short: Christ removed the record (charges, condemnation, guilt, debt) of our sins when the was nailed to the Cross. He did not “nail the law” to his cross, only our transgressions—our sins. I can hear the words of a familiar song—“They were nailed to the cross, nailed to the Cross, O how much he was willing to bear, with what anguish and loss, Jesus went to the Cross, and He carried my sins with Him there.” (This is a paraphrase from one of our Hymnal songs.). When you understand more fully the work of the atoning sacrifice, you realize that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins, and Christ’s atoning blood necessarily had to have carried our sins to the Cross. This is an imagery from the Sanctuary. So, to repeat, Christ did not take his holy law and nailed it to the Cross, but he took our sins, mingled with His blood, and nailed the record (testimony) of our sins there.

    Is that The Ministry of Healing, 333 quote on the first Communion showing Christ instituting a new observance or perpetuating the old observance of Passover? See Matthew 26:28, Mark 14:24, Luke 22:20, 1 Corinthians 11:25, 2 Corinthians 3:6 and Hebrews 9:15.
    Please re-read my response on Friday, May 16, 2014 11:40 AM: I have answered this item in great detail there. I provide adequate information that “communion” as a feast is foreign to the practices of early Church, they only knew Passover.
    Talk about Catholic interference, the NIV is most suspect (see these 16 missing verse – Matthew 17:21, Matthew 18:11, Matthew 23:14, Mark 7:16, Mark 9:44, Mark 9:46, Mark 11:26, Mark 15:28, Luke 17:36, John 5:4, Acts 8:37, Acts 15:34, Acts 24:7, Acts 28:29, Romans 16:24 and 1 John 5:7). Now, what is this Communion, or Participation, or Sharing In, or Fellowship In, or Partaking Of, or Fellowship Of, or Joint-Participation?
    Please re-read my response on Friday, May 16, 2014 11:40 AM: I have answered this item in great detail there.
    I did not rest my conclusions on the testimony of the NIV, but argued that all those translations had a dog in this theological fight, so to speak, and they did not, even in one instance, render the word “communion” as a sacred feast among Christians. This is a Catholic interference.
    Please give me even one example of a prophet who reversed his prophecy (besides conditional prophecies like that of Jonah in Jonah 3:4 and Isaiah in Isaiah 38:1) in the Bible or in the SOP. Where did Ellen White apologetically or unapologetically reversed an unconditional prophecy?
    I know of no prophet who has “reversed his prophecy,” conditional or not. But the root of your question is deeper, and that is whether or not Ellen White has reversed herself on any theological precept, and to that I shall answer below:
    Here is Ellen White in 1856, reporting on a vision she had in company of many people: “I was shown the company present at the Conference, Said the angel: “Some food for worms, some subjects of the seven last plagues, some will be alive and remain upon the earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus.” Ellen G. White, 1 Testimonies, p. 131-132. May 27, 1856.
    I will not make this reply longer by quoting the entire chapter, that’s for you to do in your research. But from my reading there is nothing “conditional” about this prophetic vision. What I find most eye-opening is the simple fact that all those who were “present,” have died, and essentially became “food for worms.” The seven last plagues have not yet fallen, Christ has not yet come, but the vision holds that some “some will be alive and remain upon the earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus.” The bottom line is clear, they are all dead today and Christ has not yet come. I would be more than happy for you to show me the “condition” in that prophecy, which was not met and thereby altered this prediction with angelic support.
    Where does Sister White provide clarity (an Appendix of sorts) to this early work of her ministry? I have seen much writing from our apologists, but nothing from her pen.
    Look at this statement: “The colored people should not urge that they be placed on an equality with white people. The relation of the two races has been a matter hard to deal with, and I fear that it will ever remain a most perplexing problem. So far as possible, everything that would stir up the race prejudice of the white people should be avoided.” 9T, p. 214. Is this the cause for the Black and White conferences in our church, even till today?
    “In reply to inquiries regarding the advisability of intermarriage between Christian young people of the white and black races, I will say that in my earlier experience this question was brought before me, and the light given me of the Lord was that this step should not be taken; for it is sure to create controversy and confusion. I have always had the same counsel to give. No encouragement to marriages of this character should be given among our people. Let the colored brother enter into marriage with a colored sister who is worthy, one who loves God, and keeps His commandments. Let the white sister who contemplates uniting in marriage with the colored brother refuse to take this step, for the Lord is not leading in this direction. Time is too precious to be lost in controversy that will arise over this matter. Let not questions of this kind be permitted to call our ministers from their work. The taking of such a step will create confusion and hindrance. It will not be for the advancement of the work or for the glory of God”.–Letter 36, 1912. (Selected Messages, Book 2, page 344, paragraphs 1,2).
    I will allow the emphasis to dictate my questions. Has this position been reversed by her since 1912?
    “You have no license from God to exclude the colored people from places of worship. Treat them as Christ’s property, which they are, just as much as yourselves. They should hold membership in the church with the white brethren. Every effort should be made to wipe out the terrible wrong [slavery] which has been done them. At the same time we must not carry things to extremes and run into fanaticism on this question. Some would think it right to throw down every partition wall and intermarry with the colored people, but this is not the right thing to teach or practice.” (The Southern Work, P. 15)
    What does this mean? Can we now violate this directive against SOP solemn counsel?
    On the Question of Jerusalem’s having been built up, we must simply consult the The Planning Zoning Department of the State of Israel, to confirm this, and they will be happy to let you know that there has been much building up. Fruther, there are millions of Jews who have accepted both the First and Second advent of Christ. Do you know any? As I’ve stated yesterday, in 1848 there was no notion of “Old Jerusalem” in East and West segments as we have since 1948. Jerusalem rises and falls as a whole, not a part of Jerusalem, and that was not the ground of the prophecy which states that it shall “never” be built up again.
    As I stated, my objective is to go beyond these nebulous points, as I have never lead anyone from belief in Ellen White’s writings, and will not venture to attempt at that here. I believe there are depths of truths available to us in God’s word today which were unfamiliar to Ellen White in her days and that we must improve the light which shines upon us today as they improved that which fell on them in their day.– https://sdaprophecies.wordpress.com/2014/05/25/bible-discussions-on-sda-doctrines-the-law-and-the-prophets/
    This continuous conversation has been continued because of one person–Ellen G White. If Sister White should awake from her grave and confess that her early views on the pagan tree were wrong, than and only then, will some accept that the Bible had condemned its practice form the start. Because of this fact, the notion of the pagan tree, should we confess that she was wrong on this point, based on the limited light given her on this topic, then we fear that she will be wrong on other points, and totally discard her writings. Strangely enough, there is only about 30% of the North American church which accept the inspiration of Ellen White, and even around the world, those churches which esteem her writings, vociferously reject the pagan tree. You’ll not see the “christmas tree” in a Jamaican church, for example, at least until recently that has been the direction of the Jamaican Union on this question. And I don’t believe it is because of some sin in their lives why they reject the pagan tree and the Easter campaign which is so rampant here.

    What I fear is that we are protecting the law of ten commandments above the TORAH, the “whole law.” If we are honest as a Church, we must confess that Adventists have historically taught only two laws: (1) the Moral law, and (2) the Ceremonial law. It is only of late that we have artificially subdivided it into dietary laws, cleanliness laws, civil laws, etc. Here is an excellent reminder of the historic Adventist position on this question: http://www.chodesh.info/day7/versus1.htm

    Unless we are completely dependent on the Bible for our conclusions, we will be speaking past each other. I would encourage you to not only read the words, but research the “meaning” of the words in the original languages to see how they were conveyed to the audiences of those times, and not limit t hem to the the current english word meaning. For example, I know this is heavy on your heart:

    “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:” Col. 2: 16

    As a church, we hold that this verse is speaking about the “nailing” of the ceremonial law including the feast days, to the Cross. And we make much out of the word “days” being pluralized, to show that these are the ceremonial or feast day sabbaths. This position ignores the fact that Paul was instructing the Colossians’ thusly: “Let no man therefore condemn you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:” The judging or condemning, was coming from vain philosophers who were bend on bring condemnation against the church for their keeping, or respecting, “of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:” The only ones worthy, or capable of passing this judgment is “the body of christ” the church.

    While we make much of the italicized word, days, which was “added” by the translators, we equally turn to Ezek. 20, and used the word “sabbaths” same as “sabbath days” in our theology, to suggest that the Sabbath is the seal of God! Is this consistent?

    “12 Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the LORD that sanctify them.
    13 But the house of Israel rebelled against me in the wilderness: they walked not in my statutes, and they despised my judgments, which if a man do, he shall even live in them; and my sabbaths they greatly polluted: then I said, I would pour out my fury upon them in the wilderness, to consume them.” Ezek. 20: 12, 13

    Notice that “sabbaths” here means the same as “sabbath days.” Our position on Ezek 20 is 180-degrees out of phase with our teaching on Col. 2, surrounding the same word “sabbaths” or “days”. God is not the author of confusion, and we have confused the truth of Scripture on this point.

    “And hallow my sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between me and you, that ye may know that I am the LORD your God.” Ezek. 20: 20. Look a the the word in bold, it is a family of holy days–“they,” and not simply the same day every week. If we restrict ourselves merely to the King James English without consult a Hebrew or Greek lexicon, we will further limit our understandings of the truth of God’s Law and other facets of truth the HOly Spirit wants to teach us. The enemy of souls has sought to destroy God’s Holy Law, but I a grateful that in the last days, God will have a people to proclaim His Law more fully. This fullness of the law begins with a fuller appreciation of the word “sabbaths” and Law. I want to be among these 144,000 evangelists, how about you?

    Shalom in Messiah,

    Garrick

    PS: I’ll post to the blog. Please forgive all typos.

    On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 6:39 AM, TeRay Bingham wrote:
    Please see blog for reply posted. https://sdaprophecies.wordpress.com/2014/05/27/the-law-our-schoolmaster/comment-page-1/#comment-5

    Should be updated there soon. You also could post your reply there so that this discussion has a chance to reach many people. They can weigh the evidence and make informed decisions.

    Here are some points I wish to address from your letter. I should apologize for assuming you understand Israel as the SDA church without asking your position. I am thrilled to see that you know the Lord has had a continuum of Israelite believers and you and I may be amongst the scattered. Does that mean you hold that a literalJerusalem on earth is referred to when God says he will restore his people Judah to Jerusalem?

    Joel 3: 1For, behold, in those days, and in that time, when I shall bring again the captivity ofJudah and Jerusalem,

    You have accepted that that means a literal Judah, do you also accept that this is a literal Jerusalemthat they will be restored to in the last days?

    I too admit that Peter was inspired in 1st and 2ndPeter.

    Now, on to Duet 31 and the word Against.

    17Then my anger shall be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide my face from them, and they shall be devoured, and many evils and troubles shall befall them; so that they will say in that day, Are not these evils come upon us, because our God is not among us?18And I will surely hide my face in that day for all the evils which they shall have wrought, in that they are turned unto other gods.

    19Now therefore write ye this song for you, and teach it the children of Israel: put it in their mouths, that this song may be a witness for meagainst the children of Israel. 20For when I shall have brought them into the land which I sware unto their fathers, that floweth with milk and honey; and they shall have eaten and filled themselves, and waxen fat; then will they turn unto other gods, and serve them, and provoke me, and break my covenant. 21And it shall come to pass, when many evils and troubles are befallen them, that this song shall testify against them as a witness; for it shall not be forgotten out of the mouths of their seed: for I know their imagination which they go about, even now, before I have brought them into the land which I sware.22Moses therefore wrote this song the same day, and taught it the children of Israel.

    23And he gave Joshua the son of Nun a charge, and said, Be strong and of a good courage: for thou shalt bring the children of Israel into the land which I sware unto them: and I will be with thee.

    24And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished, 25That Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying, 26Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee. 27For I know thy rebellion, and thy stiff neck: behold, while I am yet alive with you this day, ye have been rebellious against the LORD; and how much more after my death? 28Gather unto me all the elders of your tribes, and your officers, that I may speak these words in their ears, and call heaven and earth to record against them. 29For I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt yourselves, and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you; and evil will befall you in the latter days; because ye will do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger through the work of your hands.

    From the reference of “against” in Duet 31 we can see that it simply means to be held as a witness.

    Joshua records the same use of the word against.

    Josh 24
    And Joshua said unto all the people, Behold, this stone shall be a witness unto us; for it hath heard all the words of the LORD which he spake unto us: it shall be therefore a witness unto you, lest ye deny your God.

    Nasv
    Joshua said to all the people, “Behold, this stone shall be for a witness against us, for it has heard all the words of the LORD which He spoke to us; thus it shall be for a witness against you, so that you do not deny your God.”

    Again, we see the law against them simply means it is a legal witness un case the covenant were broken.

    The longevity of the book of the law is stated to be the same as the two great stones.

    Deut 24:28-29
    Says the book of the law would be a witness “in the latter days” to the rebellious nation.

    28Gather unto me all the elders of your tribes, and your officers, that I may speak these words in their ears, and call heaven and earth to record against them. 29For I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt yourselves, and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you; and evil will befall you in the latter days; because ye will do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger through the work of your hands.

    From the reference of “against” in Duet 31 we can see that it simply means to be held as a witness.

    It is not practical to write the entire book of the law in stone and carry it. So it was written on parchment.

    Why a separate location within the same arch? The two great stones being moved from place to place in the wilderness over 40years would have destroyed the book of the law over time from friction. As a civil engineer im sure you see that that would be a flawed design?

    Now, with the stone in center of ark and book in the side of the ark, the MERCY SEAT covers the entire ark. The mercy seat contains the entire law; everything the ark carries including the rod.

    Now I have asked you on numerous occasions. Is the book of the law from God or Moses? Since I did not see your reply I will show, all the law is attributed to Moses but from God.

    The bible makes no distinction between moses’ law and God’s law.

    Look how interchangeable tge terms are so that when you do away with moses law you have done the same to God’s law.

    Neh 9:13-14
    Thou camest down also upon mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments:14 And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant:

    John 7:19

    Has not Moses given you the law? Yet none of you keeps the law. Why do you seek to kill me?”

    Nehemiah 8:1

    And all the people gathered as one man into the square before the Water Gate. And they told Ezra the scribe to bring the Book of the Law of Moses that the Lord had commanded Israel.

    Finally, Col 2:14-16

    4 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

    The handwriting of ordinances simply means list of the legal record of our sins.

    International Standard Version

    having erased the charges that were brought against us, along with their obligations that were hostile to us. He took those charges away when he nailed them to the cross.

    NET Bible

    He has destroyed what was against us, a certificate of indebtedness expressed in decrees opposed to us. He has taken it away by nailing it to the cross.

    Aramaic Bible in Plain English

    And he has blotted out by his authority the bill of our debts which was adverse to us and he took it from the midst and nailed it to his cross.

    GOD’S WORD® Translation

    He did this by erasing the charges that were brought against us by the written laws God had established. He took the charges away by nailing them to the cross.

    Jubilee Bible 2000

    blotting out the bill of the decrees that was against us, which was contrary to us and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross {Gr. stauro – stake},

    King James 2000

    BibleBlotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

    Sabbath Days
    Now you may respond to any part you like but please at least respond to col 2:16 and acts 15.

    1. Col 2:16 sabbath days a reference to weekly Sabbath? If not provide evidence from the bible to demonstrate otherwise.

    2. In Acts 15
    Why arent any of the 4laws given to the gentiles from the 10commandments? Why are all 4 from the book of the law PLACED IN THE SIDE OF THE ARK (that are against us)???

    Acts 15
    18Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. 19Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: 20But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and fromfornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

    Why aren’t any of the laws given to new believers from the MORAL LAW 10 COMMANDMENTS?

    Why instruct new believers to keep the law that was AGAINST US; NAILED TO THE CROSS?

    Why give these gentiles the “CEREMONIAL LAWS” to keep?

    Awaiting your reply…

    T.

    Hi T,
    What does Peter’s fault of cowardess have to do with the inspiration or 1 and 2 Peter, for instance? Elijah lost his wit for a short time too in 1 King 19, but his prophecies were reliable 100%. No one claims prophets are themselves infallible (they all had faults). It’s just that they must be 100% prophetically accurate. No one speaking under inspiration is allowed inaccuracy.
    “Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.” 1 Corinthians 12:3.
    My brother, I will not contend with you about the law. And I’m not here to defend Ellen G. White. She has made no racist statements. Twisted misunderstanding has been placed on some very plain and practical statements she made. And some of my very pointed and honest questions have been sidestepped. For instance, what exactly was nailed to the cross in Colossians 2:14. Also, some unfounded allegations have been made against me, like “You mean by this quote thatJudah is the SDA church,” even though I did not say or even insinuate that. God has had a continuum of faithful people throughout the ages, not only Israel, Judah or the Adventist Church. I will not force honesty here. So let’s take the heat of the flame and passion, and get off the contentious war path.

    Again, I will not dispute the law with you. It seems you have rejected the Spirit of Prophecy (you know which part) and in the process, end up rejecting the light in the Bible. Otherwise, why have you overlooked Deuteronomy 31:26 and mentioned only Colossians 2:14? Why have you overlooked the distinct locations of the Decalog and the rest of the statutes?
    “And thou shalt put the mercy seat above upon the ark; and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee.” Exodus 25:21.
    While the covenant with all the other laws and statutes supporting the 10 commandments was placed in the side of the ark”
    “Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.” Deuteronomy 31:26.
    Why have you ignored the unit (10 statutes)? Why do you deny the delineation?
    “These words the Lord spake unto all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice: and He added no more. And He wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me.” Deuteronomy 5:22.
    It’s time for total honesty! We can talk but let’s be completely honest. OK?

    Sincerely,
    *** Geoff ***

    Sent from the Samsung Galaxy Rugby Pro, an AT&T LTE smartphone

    ——– Original message ——–
    From: Earle Greaves
    Date: 06/06/2014 2:43 PM (GMT-05:00)
    To: TeRay Bingham ,Garrick Augustus ,Roosevelt Marsden
    Subject: Re: NO COLOR LINE

    Hi TeRay,
    What does Peter’s fault of cowardess have to do with the inspiration or 1 and 2 Peter, for instance? Elijah lost his wit for a short time too in 1 King 19, but his prophecies were reliable 100%. No one claims prophets are themselves infallible (they all had faults). It’s just that they must be 100% prophetically accurate. No one speaking under inspiration is allowed inaccuracy.
    “Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.” 1 Corinthians 12:3.
    My brother, I will not contend with you about the law. And I’m not here to defend Ellen G. White. She has made no racist statements. Twisted misunderstanding has been placed on some very plain and practical statements she made. And some of my very pointed and honest questions have been sidestepped. For instance, what exactly was nailed to the cross in Colossians 2:14. Also, some unfounded allegations have been made against me, like “You mean by this quote that Judah is the SDA church,” even though I did not say or even insinuate that. God has had a continuum of faithful people throughout the ages, not only Israel, Judah or the Adventist Church. I will not force honesty here. So let’s take the heat of the flame and passion, and get off the contentious war path.

    Again, I will not dispute the law with you. It seems you have rejected the Spirit of Prophecy (you know which part) and in the process, end up rejecting the light in the Bible. Otherwise, why have you overlooked Deuteronomy 31:26 and mentioned only Colossians 2:14? Why have you overlooked the distinct locations of the Decalog and the rest of the statutes?
    “And thou shalt put the mercy seat above upon the ark; and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee.” Exodus 25:21.
    While the covenant with all the other laws and statutes supporting the 10 commandments was placed in the side of the ark”
    “Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.” Deuteronomy 31:26.
    Why have you ignored the unit (10 statutes)? Why do you deny the delineation?
    “These words the Lord spake unto all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice: and He added no more. And He wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me.” Deuteronomy 5:22.
    It’s time for total honesty! We can talk but let’s be completely honest. OK?

    Sincerely,
    *** Geoff ***
    “Those only will enter heaven who have overcome the temptation to speak and act unkindly and harshly” This Day with God, p 111.

    From: TeRay Bingham
    To: Earle Greaves ; Garrick Augustus ; Roosevelt Marsden
    Sent: Friday, June 6, 2014 12:22 PM
    Subject: RE: NO COLOR LINE

    Here it comes.

    T: {My responses are in brackets; T.}
    Geoof: Hi T.,
    I spotted your 8:45 response just now, but I’m responding to this earlier response in order to include your response.
    Let’s be quite honest. I have made a similar response to Garrick. Why in the world would you rely on a Bible and a prophet as the ones you present? If Ellen White and Peter were racists and the SOP and portions of scripture present inaccurate prophecy, then honestly, why depend on them?
    T: {Hello Geoof, Do you deny that Peter was being a bigot and had to be corrected “to his face by Paul?” or do you deny that EGW wrote statements that lean toward calling some races of people lower than whites? Listen, I worship Yahovah; not Peter and certainly not EGW.}
    Geoof: And why even profess to be a Seventh-day Adventist if you no longer share the Seventh-day Adventist world view?
    T: {I do not profess to be SDA. I could careless about that label. I was born SDA. The foundation is an excellent place to start. It is not the end of the line of truth however. Nor is the SDA church without error. I am not here to defend or discuss the SDA church. I am presenting the bible speaks of the law as a unit verses any doctrine or worldview that wants to separate the law into disposable chunks.}
    Geoof: I’m not casting you out of the church, but it seems that somehow you have jumped tracks. Often there is some darling sin or lifestyle that prevents folks from accepting tried and true standards.
    T: {So, must I be living in sin if I don’t fully accept EGW or the SDA worldview? This is arrogant.}
    Geoof: You are not saved by believing in Ellen g. White, but history has proven those who follow the spirit of prophecy and adhere to the Bible and not private interpretation fare much better.
    T:{I have stated that EGW devotional study has been beneficial to me. I was baptized because of the little book called Steps to Christ.
    But my allegiance and confidence are to El-Shaddai not El-len White.}
    Geoof: “Hear me, O Judah, and ye inhabitants of Jerusalem; Believe in the Lord your God, so shall ye be established; believe his prophets, so shall ye prosper.” 2 Chronicles 20:20
    T: {Your comment here seriously exposes you. You mean by this quote that Judah is the SDA church. You mean that Jerusalem is “in your heart.” I reject both of those “replacement theologies.” Judah, are the literal physical and spiritual children of Abraham. Jerusalem is really Jerusalem. It is not “in your heart.” God still keeps his promises. He promised to bless the literal, blood physical and spiritual children of Abraham in the exact physical location of the promised land on the earth prior to going to heaven.
    SDA’ s erroneously teach that God turned from the Jews at “the stoning of Steven.” The truth is that Israel was blinded for a time- until the fullness of the gentiles- then God will return them to the real tangible Jerusalem on earth before “take off” to heaven.}
    Geoof: The SOP is reliable, not because it proves or disproves the Bible, but because it 100% agrees with and promotes the Bible.
    T. {Your comment here sounds like that of Islamic peoples when they claim that the angel Gabriel spoke to directly Mohammed and that he, Mohammed, is without error. Mormon’s make a similar claim. You would not see any errors presented about EGW and I am fine with that. In seminary, several of her errors and disagreements are presented. I could list 100 disagreements, but that is not my point, to tear down confidence in EGW or not. My objective is to state that I only accept the bible and am not concerned with what EGW states. Do you have a problem with people accepting just the bible?
    If you have found truth in Ellen White’s writing that agrees with the bible, then simply show it to me from the bible, and not from her writings. If it can be found in the bible then why not use the bible?}
    Geoof: Being a “lesser light” to the “greater light” of the Bible does not relax the requirement for the prophet to pass or fail the Biblical tests of a prophet. And so she is either in or out just as all of the prophets recorded in the Bible. Please don’t hold on to her for mere emotional entertainment. What an insult to the Holy Spirit!
    T: {The Holy Spirit is a big God; He can respond accordingly to any insults on himself. I hold the bible canon finished with the book of Revelation. I see none of your EGW quotes as anything other than WHITE noise. Is it that you cannot prove your ideas using the bible only, so you depend on EGW?}
    Geoof: As for the law, you seem to make the case for me. The reasoning is this. Since God’s holy ten commandment law is consistent and never changing and you wish to add to it more than the 10 on the two tables of stone,
    T: {Wait, wait wait. I have not added to the ten commandments. I am telling you that the ten commandments are not the full extent of the law. For example where in the ten commandments does it say to give 10% of your income to the church? Did you see how in the same sentence you said LAW and then 10 commandemnts? That is intellectual dec.i e tThe the ten commandments are not the LAW, they are a part of it. So, it is not I that have added to the commandments but that you have limited the commandments to 9 of 10 that you like. SDA churches break the 2nd commandment regarding images of God in the use of Jesus pictures.}
    Geoof: then the others must be of the same nature and needs no adjustment. Therefore we should still be sacrificing animals regardless if Jesus came and died and rose again.
    T: {I have provided for you on 3 occasions Num 28:9 that states that sacrifices of animals is to be made each weekly Sabbath. That is twice as many animals commanded to be killed each Sabbath than on any other day. Yet, you have never sacrificed an animal on Sabbath, why? It is because you recognize that the day is holy and to be kept without sacrifices post- Christ’s’ sacrifice. The Feast of the Lord are Holy and are to be kept without sacrifices because his law is from eternity past.}
    Geoof: You correctly stated the law was kept in the ark. What you failted to recognize is the specific geographics. The 10 were stored inside the ark:
    “And thou shalt put the mercy seat above upon the ark; and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee.” Exodus 25:21.
    While the covenant with all the other laws and statutes supporting the 10 commandments was placed in the side of the ark”
    “Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.” Deuteronomy 31:26.
    Please notice the “witness against thee.” Sound familiar?
    T. {Did you fail to see the geographic location of the Ark? It is in the Most Holy Place in the Heavenly Sanctuary (and on earth)! So, though the Ten Commandments are in the center of the ark and the BOOK of the LAW in the side of the Ark, both are in the Ark and the Ark is in the most holy place. This book of the law that you deem as less than the Ten Commandments, because it is geographically in the side of the Ark, is it from GOD or from MOSES?
    Are the other commandments (the Book of the Law) from GOD or from MOSES?
    Do you mean that placing them in the side of the Ark means they are not of equal value but are somewhat lesser and not everlasting?
    Eve, if you recall was taken out of a rib the was in the side of Adam. Is she lesser or not worthy of eternity because she is from the side and not the head?}
    Geoof: Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances
    T. {Again, respectfully be informed about handwriting of ordinances. You seem to come up short in understanding them. I was there before. You owe it to yourself to discover what that means. Hint, it is a legal term that does not refer to the keeping of the law.
    Whenever you come up short you start to do personal digs such as “are you living in sin, because you do not fully embrace sister white?” You are reading with another man’s or in this case woman’s (EGW’s) glasses on.
    You are inserting the Feast Days any where you like without study. The handwriting of ordinances is NOT a reference to the Feast Days.
    You have ordinances every 13 sabbath- communion. Where did that ordinance come from? Why 13 sabbaths? Where is the command to have the ordinance of communion? Where is the command to have it every 13 sabbaths?}
    Geoof: that was against us, which was contrary to us,
    T: {Sunday Christians say the law was against us when we present the Sabbath. It is because they would rather remain ill informed than to educate themselves on the law and follow that up with obedience.
    You too would like to remain under informed and teach that God gave us a LAW that was against us and then PUNISHES us for not keeping a LAW that he KNEW was CONTRARY to us.
    This makes little sense. You must restudy this angel when you see it’s logical conclusions. The Law is holy just and good. It was never against us. Without being rude, I am willing to explain it to you just what it is that was against us and taken out of the way, if you are ready to hear it?}
    Geoff: and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross” Colossians 2:14.
    More on this a little later as time permits.
    Happy Preparation Day and Sabbath,
    ** Geoff ***
    T: {Happy Sabbath. T.}

    https://sdaprophecies.wordpress.com/2014/05/27/the-law-our-schoolmaster/comment-page-1/#comment-4

    Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 08:58:50 -0700
    From: dukearle@yahoo.com
    Subject: Re: NO COLOR LINE
    To: terayjb@hotmail.com; gaugustus336@gmail.com; rooseveltmarsden@verizon.net

    Sorry I missed it. The link does not have any comments and it’s dated November 8, 2011.
    *** Geoff ***

    “Those only will enter heaven who have overcome the temptation to speak and act unkindly and harshly” This Day with God, p 111.

    From: TeRay Bingham
    To: Earle Greaves ; Garrick Augustus ; Roosevelt Marsden
    Sent: Friday, June 6, 2014 11:09 AM
    Subject: RE: NO COLOR LINE

    My reply is in the blog. https://sdaprophecies.wordpress.com/2014/05/27/the-law-our-schoolmaster/comment-page-1/#comment-4

    Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 06:24:47 -0700
    From: dukearle@yahoo.com
    Subject: Re: NO COLOR LINE
    To: terayjb@hotmail.com; gaugustus336@gmail.com; rooseveltmarsden@verizon.net

    Hi TeRay,
    I spotted your 8:45 response just now, but I’m responding to this earlier response in order to include your response.

    Let’s be quite honest. I have made a similar response to Garrick. Why in the world would you rely on a Bible and a prophet as the ones you present? If Ellen White and Peter were racists and the SOP and portions of scripture present inaccurate prophecy, then honestly, why depend on them? And why even profess to be a Seventh-day Adventist if you no longer share the Seventh-day Adventist world view?

    I’m not casting you out of the church, but it seems that somehow you have jumped tracks. Often there is some darling sin or lifestyle that prevents folks from accepting tried and true standards. You are not saved by believing in Ellen g. White, but history has proven those who follow the spirit of prophecy and adhere to the Bible and not private interpretation fare much better.

    “Hear me, O Judah, and ye inhabitants of Jerusalem; Believe in the Lord your God, so shall ye be established; believe his prophets, so shall ye prosper.” 2 Chronicles 20:20

    The SOP is reliable, not because it proves or disproves the Bible, but because it 100% agrees with and promotes the Bible. Being a “lesser light” to the “greater light” of the Bible does not relax the requirement for the prophet to pass or fail the Biblical tests of a prophet. And so she is either in or out just as all of the prophets recorded in the Bible. Please don’t hold on to her for mere emotional entertainment. What an insult to the Holy Spirit!

    As for the law, you seem to make the case for me. The reasoning is this. Since God’s holy ten commandment law is consistent and never changing and you wish to add to it more than the 10 on the two tables of stone, then the others must be of the same nature and needs no adjustment. Therefore we should still be sacrificing animals regardless if Jesus came and died and rose again. You correctly stated the law was kept in the ark. What you failed to recognize is the specific geographics. The 10 were stored inside the ark:
    “And thou shalt put the mercy seat above upon the ark; and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee.” Exodus 25:21.
    While the covenant with all the other laws and statutes supporting the 10 commandments was placed in the side of the ark”
    “Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.” Deuteronomy 31:26.
    Please notice the “witness against thee.” Sound familiar?
    “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross” Colossians 2:14.
    More on this a little later as time permits.

    Happy Preparation Day and Sabbath,

    ** Geoff ***
    “Those only will enter heaven who have overcome the temptation to speak and act unkindly and harshly” This Day with God, p 111.

    From: TeRay Bingham
    To: Earle Greaves ; Garrick Augustus ; Roosevelt Marsden
    Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2014 5:47 PM
    Subject: RE: NO COLOR LINE

    Geoof,

    Great to hear from you my brother, I am TeRay Bingham. I was raised SDA and am appreciative of that foundation. I have two SDA uncles that are pastors. I am a third generation SDA. However, I use the bible and history only and have never quoted from Ellen White to sustain a point of scripture and have never accepted a quote from her to believe or refute scripture. I do not hold her writings as scripture. I do not believe the writings she has called Spirit of Prophecy or Testimonies are what the bible refers to by the same name. I usually ignore any quote from her writings that you send to establish a point of doctrine. I have read her books and am reading them now for devotion and have been blessed.

    The points you raise are important and so I will comb through this email and respond to some of them each time, but not all at once.

    Here is a quote from Ellen White as evidence of why I don’t use her materials to prove or disprove the bible.

    “The hour of the evening sacrifice arrives. The priest stands in the court of the Temple in Jerusalem ready to offer a lamb as sacrifice. As he raises the knife to kill the victim, the earth convulses. Terrified, he drops the knife and the lamb escapes. Over the din of the earthquake he hears a loud ripping noise as an unseen hand rends the veil of the Temple from top to bottom.

    Across town, black clouds enshroud a cross. When Jesus, the Passover Lamb of God, calls out, “It is finished!” He dies for the sins of the world.

    Type has met antitype. The very event the Temple services have pointed to through the centuries has taken place. The Saviour has completed His atoning sacrifice, and because symbol has met reality, the rituals foreshadowing this sacrifice have been superseded. Thus the rent veil, the dropped knife, the escaped lamb.

    But there is more to salvation history. It reaches beyond the cross. Jesus’ resurrection and ascension direct our attention to the heavenly sanctuary, where, no longer the Lamb, He ministers as priest. The once-for-all sacrifice has been offered (Heb. 9:28); now He makes available to all the benefits of this atoning sacrifice.”

    And at the very same Passover here is the bible:

    “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God .” Luke 22:15, 16.

    If I understand sister white correctly, it would seem that at the very moment when Jews kill the Passover lamb, Christ was on the cross and said “It is finished.” Then the lamb that was going to be killed escaped and that would have been the last lamb that represented Christ.

    However, the bible says that Jesus was not on the cross at the time of Passover meal because he was eating with his disciples.

    In this instance, I must accept or reject the bible based on what EGW says. I only accept the bible. EGW’s comments here are emotionally entertaining at best.

    You have already established that the Law is eternal from eternity past. The point you and I have a disagreement on is that the LAW means just the 10 commandments.

    Here you suggest that Moses received only the 10 commandments: “and He added no more. And He wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me.”

    The 10 Commandments are a transcript of God’s character:

    “The law of God in the sanctuary in heaven is the great original, of which the precepts inscribed upon the tables of stone and recorded by Moses in the Pentateuch were an unerring transcript.”

    But, the bible teaches that Moses himself recorded a vast amount of law beyond the two tables of stone. Ex 24 4 And Moses wrote all the words of the Lord, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel.

    Again, you correctly lay the following text and summary: ‘Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law.’ Matthew 5:18. The law of God, being a revelation of His will, a transcript of His character, must forever endure, ‘as a faithful witness in heaven.’ Not one command has been annulled; not a jot or tittle has been changed.

    Yet, if I understand you correctly, you are saying, at the cross other laws were actually fulfilled. That means, not merely jots and tittles wiped out but whole chunks and chapters are passed away, although heaven and earth are not. That means you disagree with your own quote that not one command has been annulled because you have reduce that “not one command” to just ten, plus, plus (diets, and tithing). I feel you have not a reliable biblical source to extract diets and tithing from the death of the ceremonial law ashes, because as you claim, they were before the ceremonial law was given or because they make sense to you. This is not a
    hermeneutical stance. This is here a little there a little picking and choosing. It is an unfair form of reasoning.

    My two year old does the same thing. Don’t be offended here. I know that we have established a seriousness for truth seeking. But, as I was saying, I tell my two year old “No, you cannot have it. It is dangerous. Daddy says no!” And he just says “I want it” until I give in or go nuts. He is not considering my points, he is not using sound reasoning. He is not weighing the evidence. He is just having his own way. You cannot have your own way with the ten commandments and add the other two, one for good measure, and one to grow on.

    The commandments came in a package. They are a set. I would even say yes, they came in two sets; the Ten on stone and the others written and placed in the side of the ark; the totality is called the Law of God. What biblical exegetical standard do you use to rescue the dietary laws and tithing from the other ceremonial laws? What measure do you use to determine which laws get in the ceremonial packet and which are left out?

    And when choosing the dietary laws why did you not accept the commandment against eating of blood and how to properly kill an animal to drain the blood, as did the gentiles in Acts 15? The meat that Adventist call “clean” is not clean do to the blood violation! Why did you not take the whole law on dietary cleanliness?

    Here you quote Psalms:

    ‘Forever, O Lord, Thy word is settled in heaven.’ ‘All His commandments are sure. They stand fast for ever and ever.’ ” Psalm 119:89

    But just like the Sabbath School Quarterly, in one breath you say we keep his whole law, but you have your fingers crossed, because you mean only the Ten Commandments will last and forever. You teach the other commandments have expired except for homosexuality and beastiality.

    [Message clipped]

    Like

  2. To the Reader:

    I never did receive Geoff’s article on “Honesty,” and that is why it is not posted here. The conversation, seems to have died out without our discussing “honesty” with Ellen G. White. Stay tuned….

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: