Seventh-Day Adventists/More detail please?

Advertisement


Frank wrote at 2013-02-18 02:17:09
2 16 2013 - More detail please



<<< The expert’s answer: >>>



I will try to flesh out my answer for you. It is really very simple and obvious. God gave the Abrahamic Covenant and then 430 years later at Sinai gave Israel the Old Covenant Law.



<<< After hundreds of years of Egyptian bondage and idolatrous worship the children of Israel had for the most part lost the knowledge of God and His laws. The world had already been destroyed because of lawlessness so there must have been a law to define sin even then, as sin is lawlessness. >>>



This Law could not make the promise to Abraham void.



<<< For the covenant promise that was given to Abraham to be fulfilled, obedience to the law was required. “. . . the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect. And I will make my covenant between me and thee . . .” (Genesis 17:1, 2 KJV) Obedience to the law is always a condition of receiving the promised inheritance. >>>



My answer should not have to be so detailed. However, because SDAs try to split ever hair I have to give rather lengthy answers such as this one. I pray this is helpful to you.  In context the added law was the Old Covenant law not just a part of it. The Israelites were under the Abrahamic Covenant then at Sinai was added the Old Covenant. The Bible repeatedly says that the Israelites were under the Old Covenant Law (see Hebrews 8: 8-9:4; 2 Corinthians 3).



<<< The Mosaic Covenant was not added to the Abrahamic Covenant. They are two separate covenants that coexisted. SDA’s believe that the law of the Abrahamic Covenant is the Ten Commandments. Obedience to the law (and that includes the sacrificial law before the cross) has always been a requirement, even before sin (and obviously no sacrifices were required before sin). The expert can’t seem to get beyond his belief that the law given at Sinai is not the same law that Adam and Eve transgressed and that cannot be.  >>>



“Then the LORD spoke to you from the midst of the fire; you heard the sound of words, but you saw no form—only a voice. So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, that is, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone” (Deuteronomy 4:12-13 NASB).

So the law added to the Abrahamic Covenant was the law covenant of Sinai that was centered on the Ten Commandments. The ceremonial sacrifices were not a law unto themselves they were included in the 613 commandment covenant that we call the Old Covenant.



<<< The Ten Commandment law, the law that was written in stone at Sinai, is the law that Adam and Eve transgressed. The law given at Sinai through Moses included all the laws that were for the new nation God was about to establish in the Promised Land. Its foundational principles are the principles of the Decalogue and it also contained the ceremonial law that was a separate and distinct law, added after sin, which was centered on the Hebrew Sanctuary when it was given to the children of Israel. This is the law known as the Law of Moses or the “Old Covenant”. There was no salvation in keeping the Old Covenant law. >>>



The Abrahamic Covenant was based on faith. “Abram believed the Lord, and he credited it to him as righteousness” (Genesis 15:6 NIV). The Old Covenant was based on works. “The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, it says, ‘The person who does these things will live by them’” (Galatians 3:12 NIV).



<<< The Mosaic Covenant was not given as a means of salvation. >>>



The Old Covenant was one ball of wax. “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it” (James 2:10 NIV). It was the Old Covenant Law that was added to faith not just the ceremonial law.



<<< The expert often points out the importance of context when answering questions on Bible doctrine but often ignores it when it doesn’t work in his favor. He quotes James 2:10 and says James is speaking of the Old Covenant (Law of Moses). The very next verse which must be included for proper context reveals that James is speaking of the Decalogue and not the Law of Moses. Whereas much space in Paul’s letters to the churches was spent explaining that the works of the Law of Moses, the ceremonial remedies for sin, were no longer binding as they had been fulfilled by Christ, James does not address that issue. His letter concerns only the ratified Abrahamic covenant whose law is the principles of the Ten Commandments written on the heart (see Hebrews 8:10). Here is the quote from James, who is writing to the scattered twelve tribes, in its proper context, “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law. So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.” (James 2:10-12 KJV) In context it can be seen that James is speaking of the Decalogue which defines the moral law and reveals sin. He calls it a law of liberty and that is what it was before it was transgressed. Further proof that James is not speaking about the Old Covenant is his description of “works”. James asks, “What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? (James 2:14 KJV) “Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.” (James 2:17-18 KJV) How can James indicate that works of the law are a necessary component of the Christian walk when Paul states that New Testament Christians are saved by grace and not by the works of the law? The only possible explanation is that there are indeed two separate laws. The works of the law that Paul says are no longer required are the rites and ceremonies of the Law of Moses that the Jews were attempting to impose on the Gentile converts that Christ had nailed to the cross (see Ephesians 2:15); while the works of the law that James wrote about are the result of fulfilling the “royal law” which is defined by the Decalogue. “If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:” (James 2:8 KJV).  >>>



Ceremonial sacrifices were nothing new to be added to the Abrahamic Covenant. God’s people were offering sacrifices at least as early as Cain & Abel (see Genesis 4:3-5). Abraham was no stranger to sacrifices (see Genesis 22:1-13). Immediately after the Ten Commandments were given to Israel God spoke of sacrifices (see Exodus 20:24). So ceremonial sacrifices were nothing new to God’s people; therefore, they could not be what were added to the Abrahamic Covenant.



<<< The sacrifices were added to the moral law at the same time the covenant of grace was introduced. Grace did not do away with the law. If that were possible a substitutionary atonement would not have been necessary. The sacrifices revealed the promised Savior as the sacrifice for sins

“ And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.” (Galatians 3:17 KJV) This verse says that the law covenant at Sinai does not cancel the grace covenant. Salvation before the cross had always been and would always be through faith in the promised savior. “Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.” (Galatians 3:19 KJV) The promised seed is Christ. He is the remedy for sin that replaced the ceremonial remedy for sin when He accomplished His atoning sacrifice. The fact that sacrifices were nothing new is meaningless. The Hebrew sanctuary and its services with the Levitical priesthood was indeed something that had never before been seen. The entire plan of salvation was represented by the rites and ceremonies of the Jewish system of worship. The courtyard and the tent itself and the articles of furniture made for it, all said something meaningful about the plan of salvation. The presence of God dwelt with the children of Israel and spoke with Moses from inside the tabernacle. >>>



“What I am saying is this: the Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise. For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it to Abraham by means of a promise” (Galatians 3:17-18 NASB).

In the Old Covenant inheritance was not based on keeping the ceremonial law it was based on keeping the whole Old Covenant law.



<<< The Old Covenant (Law of Moses) was not based on keeping the law. The Old Covenant law was not given as a means of salvation. The ceremonial law was institute by God as His response to the sin problem when Adam and Eve sinned. This is the law that was added to the moral law. Had there been no sin there would have been no need for a savior and therefore there would have been no Law of Moses with its ceremonial requirements. Adam and Eve broke the everlasting covenant (the principles of the Decalogue written in the heart and kept through love and gratitude for the creator) when Eve yielded to the serpent’s temptation and plunged the world into sin. Sin is transgression of the law and the broken law is defined by the Ten Commandments that were given to the children of Israel at Sinai. The nation of Israel was to be an example for the nations of the blessings that would be bestowed upon any nation that upheld the moral law by worshipping the true God and keeping His commandments (see Isaiah 56:6, 7). >>>   



“Now, O Israel, listen to the statutes and the judgments which I am teaching you to perform, so that you may live and go in and take possession of the land which the Lord, the God of your fathers, is giving you. You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.



(A portion of the expert's answer is removed because of length)



One purpose of the Law was to make man realize his sinfulness. “What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, ‘You shall not covet.’” (Romans 7:7 NKJV; cf. Romans 3:20; 5:20; 7:13). Ideally this knowledge should drive man to seek the Savior (cf. Galatians 3:24). The Old Covenant Law was not contrary to or at cross purposes to the covenant of grace. The Law highlighted the absolute necessity of grace for salvation. There is no conflict between Law and grace in God’s plan. Only when men try to emphasize what God has de-emphasized does a conflict develop.



<<< Jesus certainly didn’t de-emphasize the Ten Commandment law. “If ye love me, keep my commandments.” (John 14:15 KJV) “. . . if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.” (Matthew 19:17 KJV) “He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.” (John 14:21 KJV) “If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.” (John 15:10 KJV) “Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.” (Revelation 22:14 KJV) >>>



Paul warned against those who emphasize the law, in whole or in part, that they would persecute those who are of the Spirit. “But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now also” (Galatians 4:29 NASB).



<<< Paul is warning the Gentile converts that the Judaizers would persecute them if they refused to be circumcised and keep the ceremonies of the Law of Moses (see Galatians 5:4-6). The remedy for sin in the Old Covenant was defined by the ceremonial law. That remedy is Christ. Christ’s sacrifice didn’t do away with the law. He establishes His laws in the heart and mind by His Holy Spirit as believers perform the righteous works of the law through obedience to the Holy Spirit. >>>



The Law in v. 17 included the ceremonial law, but was not limited to it. (Note “this whole law” in quote above.) If Paul meant only the ceremonial law then he would have specified it. To Paul, as to all Israelites, “the Law” was understood to mean the whole Old Covenant all 613 commandments. “For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them’” (Galatians 3:10 ESV). The Book of the Law contained all the law the Israelites were obligated to obey. “Keep this Book of the Law always on your lips; meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do everything written in it. Then you will be prosperous and successful” (Joshua 1:8 NIV; cf. Deuteronomy 31:24-26). The addition of Law to the Abrahamic Covenant would be a major addition. The Abrahamic Covenant was for all people.  “In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice” (Genesis 22:18 NKJV). The Old Covenant was only for Israel. “And there I have put the ark, in which is the covenant of the Lord which He made with the children of Israel” (2 Chronicles 6:11 NKJV). “Not with our ancestors did the Lord make this covenant, but with us (the Israelites), who are all of us here alive today” (Deuteronomy 5:3 NRSV).

This would be a major change to the Abrahamic Covenant. I believe that these examples prove that the Law that came 430 years after the Abrahamic Covenant spoken of by Paul was the Old Covenant Law not just the sacrifices or the ceremonial law, but “this whole law”.



<<< The expert picks a Bible translation to suit his particular belief. The KJV of Deuteronomy 5:3 is, “The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.” The expert says this verse must mean the Patriarchs but even if it did it would prove nothing as the Patriarchs had the Ten Commandment law. The law they didn’t have was the law that was for the new nation of Israel. It should come as no surprise that the basis for the national law was the Ten Commandment law. It should also come as no surprise that the added ceremonial law was also present as Christ had not yet accomplished the promised atoning sacrifice. >>>



In 3:19 Paul tells us why the Old Covenant Law was added to the revelation of God. It was added due to man’s sinfulness. The Law was given to show man that he could not possibly obtain salvation by his law-keeping. “For the promise that he would inherit the world did not come to Abraham or to his descendants through the law but through the righteousness of faith. If it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void” (Romans 4:13-14 NRSV).



<<< Before sin, the principles of the moral law were written in the heart and mind of Adam and Eve. If there was no law then the test given them was meaningless. It is the law that reveals righteousness and defines sin. The command to not eat from a certain tree is only a command. Unless there is a law to define it there can be no sin as sin is transgression of the law. As long as the expert insists that the Ten Commandment law was done away with at the cross and replaced with a better law he will be at odds with scripture and the one who gave it. >>>



In 3:21 Paul continues with his theme that the Old Covenant is inferior to and cannot invalidate the Abrahamic Covenant of faith. “Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law” (NASB). Did the Israelites believe that the ceremonial law or the sacrifices could impart life apart from observing the rest of the Law? No, they didn’t; however, they did believe that keeping the whole Old Covenant Law could impart life. “Then it will be righteousness for us, if we are careful to observe all these commandments before the LORD our God, as He has commanded us” (Deuteronomy 6:25 NKJV; review Deuteronomy 4:1-8 above).



<<< Christ didn’t do away with the law because it was transgressed. The Old Covenant had a specific purpose and was rendered obsolete when that purpose was accomplished. There is nothing inferior about the Mosaic Law and there is nothing inferior about the forever and ever, and for all people Ten Commandment law. The Mosaic Covenant was not given to be a means of salvation and it didn’t invalidate the Abrahamic Covenant. >>>



“But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed” (Galatians 3:22-23 NASB). It was the Old Covenant Law that kept the Israelites shut up and in custody until Christ came with the Gospel. The Law taught the Israelites that they needed a Savior. It was not just the ceremonial law that taught this, but “the Law”. “…for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin” (Romans 3:20b NASB).



<<< The law that defines righteousness and reveals sin is the Ten Commandment law. The law that revealed the Savior in the Old Testament is the ceremonial law and that is found in the Law of Moses. >>>



One purpose of the law was to make sin known. This was Paul’s very point in the next verse. “Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith” (Galatians 3:24 NASB). The Old Covenant Law taught the need for Christ.



<<< That is exactly correct. The Law of Moses was not given as a means of salvation. The law was never given as a means of salvation anywhere in the Bible. >>>



What happened once its purpose was realized? “But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:25-26 NASB). Once its goal was reached the tutor; i.e. the Law was dismissed. Its job accomplished it becomes obsolete to the one who believes in Christ. “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death” (Romans 8:2 NASB). What is the law of sin and death? Is it only the ceremonial law? No, it was the whole Old Covenant Law that was centered on the tablets of stone. “But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones…” (2 Corinthians 3:7 NASB).



<<< If the Ten Commandments had not been transgressed its principles written in the heart and mind would have guaranteed the joy of life with Christ in a sinless world for all eternity.  Once transgressed, man transferred his allegiance to the tempter and found himself a helpless slave to his fleshly passions. There was no fault with the law. The law is perfect.  “The works of his hands are verity and judgment; all his commandments are sure. They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness.” (Psalms 111:7-8 KJV) When Christ accomplished His atoning sacrifice the “tutor” was dismissed as the expert claims. The tutor is the Law of Moses. Its lesson was that the remedy for sin is Christ. No longer were the sacrifices and offerings for sin required as a substitute for the atoning sacrifice. Finally, the expert throws in 2 Corinthians 3:7 but only in part. “But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones…” By including only part of the verse he gives a false impression of its meaning. The entire verse reads, “But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?” (2 Corinthians 3:7-8 KJV) The “glory that was to be done away” is the ceremonial system that for hundreds of years had pointed to the cross of Christ. It is the glory of Christ as revealed in that law that illuminated the face of Moses at Sinai. Jesus did not do away with the Ten Commandment law by His atoning sacrifice on the cross. He did away with the condemnation of the law for all that would believe in Him for righteousness. >>>



If one still does not understand his point that the Old Covenant has passed away, Paul states this fact once more.  

“Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar” (Galatians 4:21-24 NKJV).



<<< All the experts answers assume the Old covenant law is an indivisible law that consists of 613 commandments all having equal weight and no particular distinction. The reality is, there is no agreement that there are 613 commandments in the Pentateuch and it is certain that they didn’t all end at the cross. The idea of 613 Old Covenant laws was first proposed by a Jewish Rabbi hundreds of years after the cross. This is a man who was still looking for the first advent of Christ and believed they were all still binding. Also, there is no scriptural support for the contention that there are no distinctions in the laws of the Bible. There are the Ten Commandments written in stone, the Law of Moses for the new nation given by God to Moses who wrote it in the Book of the Law. The ordinances of the Hebrew sanctuary and its services are also written in the book of the law. There are the statutes and judgments in the Law of Moses that define the principles of the Ten Commandment law for the new nation. >>>



Paul says in no uncertain terms that Hagar represents the Old Covenant. So what are Christians to do with that covenant?

“ Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? ‘Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.’ So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free” (Galatians 4:30-31 NKJV).



Paul is crystal clear that Christians are to cast out the Old Covenant Law and live by faith for we are not children of the Law. He warns the Galatians not to put themselves under any of the Old Covenant laws or their freedom in Christ will be jeopardized. “It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery” (Galatians 5:1 NASB). Even though the Galatians had accepted Christ by faith they wanted to add Old Covenant observances which Paul expressly forbid. He called the Galatians foolish for thinking that they could be saved by faith and yet add law-keeping to perfect them.   

“You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith?  Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? Did you suffer so many things in vain—if indeed it was in vain? So then, does He who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith?” (Galatians 3:1-5 NASB).



<<< The Galatians aren’t being criticized for keeping the moral law. They are being criticized for believing the Judaizers about the importance of keeping the ceremonies of the Law of Moses in order to be saved, Including circumcision. >>>>



To sum up: the giving of the Old Covenant Law cannot invalidate the Abrahamic Covenant which promised blessings for the whole world based on faith in Abraham’s Seed who is Christ. The Law was given so that sinful man would recognize his sinfulness and hopelessness before God. The Old Covenant was designed to drive man to his Savior. Once the God-designed purpose of the Law has been reached the Law is dismissed as a tutor/guardian/disciplinarian. The Law is not of faith, but we are saved by faith becoming children of Abraham and consequently heirs to the promise.  The belief that by the Law Paul means only the ceremonial law is theologically driven not contextual.



“But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, so that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons” (Galatians 4:4-5 NASB).



Was Jesus born under the ceremonial law to redeem those who were under the ceremonial law? Or was he born under the Law to redeem those who were under the whole Old Covenant Law?



<<< Jesus was born to redeem fallen man. He came to free those who were in bondage to sin. When the expert asks the question, “Or was he born under the Law to redeem those who were under the whole Old Covenant Law?” His question assumes that the Ten Commandments do not constitute the broken moral law that has governed man since he was created.  He teaches that the Ten Commandments did not exist before Sinai. He talks about universal laws that everybody knows but scripture tells us that it is the law that defines sin and the law was given to fallen man in the form of Ten Commandments at Sinai. “What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.” (Romans 7:7 KJV) Since do not covet is one of those “universal moral laws” then why did he not know it until it was revealed by the written (or spoken) law? >>>



When Paul writes that Sarah & Hagar are two covenants one of whom began at Mount Sinai, how should one interpret “two covenants”? (see Galatians 4:24). Are they not the Old (Hagar) and the New (Sarah) covenants? Is that not the natural interpretation based on the context? To be honest with Scripture one must see that interpretation is the only one that makes sense of all the evidence.



<<< The law that defines sin and reveals righteousness is the law that all mankind has been called to keep from creation. If it is not then the Bible must be discarded as unreliable and capricious. The only place in the Bible in which the law is given begins with exodus chapter 20. The Ten Commandments represent the entire broken law and encompass every possible sin. The Ten Commandments tell us how we are to show our love for God (1-4) and how we are to show our love for one another (6-10). Its principles are demonstrated in the stories of the Old Testament both before and after it is given but nowhere else are the sacred precepts spoken and written by the creator Himself. >>>



Paul says to cast out the Old Covenant. “ Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? ‘Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.’” (4:30 NKJV). Paul does not make any distinction between so-called moral and ceremonial parts.



<<< Paul tells of a distinction in the book of Hebrews. “Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.” (Hebrews 9:1 KJV) This is the ceremonial law that the expert says Paul doesn’t recognize. Paul also understood that the ceremonial observances of the Law of Moses were fulfilled by Christ and to continue them was a denial of the efficacy of Christ’s atoning sacrifice for forgiveness of sins. He called these ceremonial observances “works of the law”. (see Galatians 2:16, 3:2, 5, 10, Romans 9:32) >>>



It’s all one Law and unless one learns that he will never be able to understand what the Bible teaches. The dividing of the Old Covenant Law into different categories is without Scriptural support. It was all one Law and those in that covenant were bound to observe all the laws.



<<< The short response is no. The Law of Moses was one law for the Nation to which it was given. Its ceremonies ended at the cross as they had been designed to do, while the principles of the Ten Commandment law are established in the heart and mind of believers through faith in Christ for forgiveness of sins and obedience to the Holy Spirit for righteousness under the ratified New (Abrahamic) Covenant. The law (Mosaic) covenant didn’t invalidate salvation by grace through faith in Christ. Neither did Christ’s fulfillment of the ceremonial shadows invalidate the Ten Commandment law. When the principles of the Decalogue have been established in the heart and mind as God intended from the beginning, sin and sinners will be no more. We have the promise from the book of Nahum, “What do ye imagine against the LORD? he will make an utter end: affliction shall not rise up the second time.”

(Nahum 1:9 KJV) >>>



God Bless You,

Brother Sal



<<< In Christ’s love,

        Frank >>>




Bro. Tim wrote at 2013-02-20 23:32:57
Bro. Sal, thank you for the excellent detailed answer. I'm sorry if I bothered you by asking for more detail but your answers are always biblical and I enjoy reading them. Thanks again for the great work you do against this cult.


John wrote at 2013-02-21 18:43:53
Frank,

Thank you again for another detailed rebuttal to Sal’s lengthy yet predictable assumptions surrounding his rather prideful interpretations of scripture.  Your responses come straight from the Bible without any preconception or bias and I always enjoy reading them. They are a source of inspiration and contribute to my daily Bible studies.  I have also on many occasions used them as a basis for my weekly Sabbath School lessons.  

You are truly a blessing to this site.  Not only for fellow SDAs that already understand the plan of salvation and are saddened by the disrespect a small group of fellow Christians have towards our beliefs, but also for those that are earnestly seeking God’s truth without the influence of those that put their own understanding above that of the Bible.  

I will continue to pray that others will eventually understand that we are not some deranged cult but a group of fellow believers that love the Lord and are doing our best to prepare everyone on this planet for His soon return.

Maranatha!!

John  


Seventh-Day Adventists

All Answers


Answers by Expert:


Ask Experts

Volunteer


Sal

Expertise

I am privileged to be able to offer an alternative insight into the complicated world of Seventh-Day Adventists (SDA) theology. I will rely heavily on the Bible, but will also consider history and use logic in exposing deficiencies in SDA teachings. I would ask anyone who is considering becoming a SDA or if you are already in the SDA church, but are searching for the truth, to please allow me to offer a different explanation for the claims of the SDA. Remember : "The truth will set you free" (John 8:32). I can answer your questions pertaining to the beliefs and history of the SDA. I am not able to answer questions concerning spirituality or church discipline.

Experience

I have extensively studied the theology of the Seventh-Day Adventists (SDA) for a number of years. I have many books and tape sets produced by experts in this field of study. I have debated current members of the SDA church. I have a great desire to help these people see the truth.

Education/Credentials
M.S. degree in Food, Nutrition, and Dietetics

©2016 About.com. All rights reserved.