| Author | Message | ||
| Indy4now Registered user Username: Indy4now Post Number: 946 Registered: 2-2008  |
I've just finished reading this book called "I Can't See God Because I'm in the Way" by Bruce Bickel and Stan Jantz. In one of the chapters they talked about the overall narrative and purpose of the Bible which is that God created the world and it was good. Sin entered and separated us from God. Since then, God has been restoring His relationship with man. In restoring His relationship with us, the result is that our moral conduct is restored. This started me thinking about how my views have completely changed since I've left Adventism. Within the framework of Adventism, I believed that by restoring moral conduct, then my relationship with God would be restored. As an Adventist, everything that was presented to me from the Bible was to elevate the 10C's because that was the standard by which my moral conduct was measured. In Adventism, this is how the narrative and the purpose of the Bible was instilled… 1. God created the world and it was good. Sin entered. I learned that our moral conduct had failed. Adam had broken one of the 10 commandments… even though I couldn't figure out which one. Ha! I didn't know that Adam had been separated from God and had died. I believed that because of his sin, God needed to restore moral conduct. Thus the beginning of the framework… the whole Bible was to reveal to me about the story of restoring my moral conduct. 2. As an Adventist, the first covenant was inducted in order to restore moral conduct. God gave His 10 commandments in order for us to know how to restore our moral conduct. The fact that sacrifices were offered to atone us in order to forgive our sin was insignificant. After all, the 10 commandments were not a burden and could be kept so that a sacrifice didn't have to be offered. Yet if we made a mistake and broke a commandment… our safety net was the sacrifice. That's all the sacrifice was for… to be used as a safety net. 3. When Jesus became a man, He kept the Law perfectly. If He could keep the Law, then I could. Jesus was my example that it was possible to keep the 10 commandments and restore my moral conduct. This was more important than restoring my relationship with God. Restoring my relationship with God would be a result of restoring my moral conduct. I was taught that if I loved Him, then I would keep His commandments (10C's that is). So keep the 10C's and that would be proof of my love for Him. Belief in Christ, prayer, submission, His word in my heart were not proof of my restored moral conduct… keeping the 10 commandments was. 4. Then Christ's death. I was taught that His death did not remove my sins, but only paid the penalty of sin which was death. My sins were then transferred into heaven and written into books. Ellen White wrote:
So, unless my moral conduct was restored and my "character was found to be in harmony with the law of God [10 commandments] my sins would not be blotted out. If my sins were not blotted out, how could my relationship with God be restored? Again, the focus was on restoring moral conduct. 5. Tribulation. Again, in Adventism, tribulation was all about restoring moral conduct. Believers would be given a choice, they could choose to keep ALL of the 10 commandments or choose to break the fourth commandment. Tribulation was not about whether I believed in Christ for my salvation… but whether I would restore my moral conduct by keeping ALL 10 commandments (most importantly… to not break that 4th commandment). Those who chose to not worship God on the weekly sabbath were in rebellion and thus not saved. After all, their moral conduct had not been restored if they didn't worship God on a Saturday. 6. Then, because of those people who "restored" their moral conduct by keeping the 10 commandments, God would then be vindicated. You see, I had learned that Satan accused God of giving commandments that were too hard for us to keep. Eventually, we could show Satan that our character was in harmony with the 10 commandments. Then God could show Satan that He was right and His people (if they truly loved Him) could keep His commandments… even the fourth. You see, my whole theology revolved around restoring moral conduct and not restoring my relationship with God. Oh sure… my relationship was important, just not as important as my moral conduct. No wonder coming out of Adventism is such a STRUGGLE!!!! You take away our dependency on the Law… and we flip out! At least I did. The law was my foundation and my life. It was weaved in and out of my theology so intricately that I didn't even realize how deep it went. Living by the Spirit are just empty words to an Adventist because they're whole foundation is built on this belief that they have to restore their moral conduct in order to have a relationship with God. This paradigm only leads to a theology based on works. So lets reverse this thought…The purpose of the Bible is to reveal God's plan of restoring His relationship with us which results in restoring our moral conduct. Starting at the top: 1. God created the world and it was good. Sin entered by way of Adam's sin. That sin separated God from Adam and broke their relationship. This made me think of what happens when I've done something that hurts my husband. It's not the action so much that breaks my heart but it's the result of that action. That action becomes the wall that causes us to distance ourselves from each other. That's what breaks my heart… the gap left behind from my action. God had to have felt this way with Adam. I'm sure it broke His heart that Adam sinned… but I believe that He was even more hurt by the gap that was left from that sin. That's why He sent His Son!!! To restore the gap! Out of restoring the gap, our moral conduct changes because of His love for us. 2. If the first covenant reveals how God is restoring His relationship with us… then the 10 commandments step into the background as the sacrifices step out in front. An Israelite could not worship God without being restored first. The provision of a sacrifice restored their relationship to God not their moral conduct. As we all know… they kept on sinning even after they offered a sacrifice. But out of that sacrifice they were freed and forgiven of their sin. The wall of sin was broken down and the gap was closed. 3. If Christ's purpose as a man was to reveal God's plan to restore our relationship with Him, then look to the cross. He was born under to law to redeem us from the law so that through His death, our relationship with God is restored. So much to be said about His sacrifice… He restored us in every way imaginable so that we could have a relationship with God. Out of this relationship, our love for God becomes our motivator. Out of this motivation… our moral conduct is restored. This is why Paul writes that without love, we are like a clanging cymbal. We can try to restore our moral conduct… but without love, it's just noise and we 're are still not relationship with God. 4. Persecution. God knows that people outside of a relationship with Him will persecute His people. In John 15:21 Christ tells His disciples, "But all these things they will do to you for My name's sake, because they do not know the One who sent Me." Again, in restoring His relationship with us, those who are outside of that relationship will hate us. This has nothing to do with moral conduct, but everything to do with our relationship with God. I know that 2 Corinthians 3 teaches us that the Law is a veil but I am convinced it is a concrete reinforced block wall. It wasn't meant to be one… the Law's only purpose was to reveal to us that we NEED Jesus to restore our relationship with God. I am so grateful that the Holy Spirit continues to teach and reveal to me God's simple plan. How can we not love our God that pursues us, loves us and wants to keep us close to Him? vivian | ||
| Nowisee Registered user Username: Nowisee Post Number: 687 Registered: 5-2009 |
Excellent, Vivian! You hit the nail right on the head. And it all sounded so normal to us, and the Bible was confusing, because it didn't fit with our paradigm. I always just thought it was me--that something was wrong with me because the NT didn't make sense! | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 6950 Registered: 9-2006  |
Looking from the top down, a very important hint is presented to us right off the bat. Genesis 3:8 And they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. Genesis 3:9 Then the Lord God called to Adam and said to him, "Where are you?" Genesis 3:10 So he said, "I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; and I hid myself." Man has been hiding himself ever since because his sin has unclothed him, and he stands naked, and ever since God has been asking, "Where are you?" In the 'cool of the day' he wants to walk and talk with us. He "cloths" us in Jesus, the perfect and lasting sacrifice. Fast forward to here. Corinthians II 5:2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed with our habitation which is from heaven, Corinthians II 5:3 if indeed, having been clothed, we shall not be found naked. Corinthians II 5:4 For we who are in this tent groan, being burdened, not because we want to be unclothed, but further clothed, that mortality may be swallowed up by life. Corinthians II 5:5 Now He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who also has given us the Spirit as a guarantee.. This 'Walking and talking' with us goes much deeper, but you are not ready for an explanation of that right now. River | ||
| Indy4now Registered user Username: Indy4now Post Number: 947 Registered: 2-2008 |
you see River... with our paradigm so ingrained in our Ellenology we would have never seen that correlation because it wouldn't have fit into our need to "restore our moral conduct". Now with our veil removed, we can begin to digest these insights you have. How beautiful is that... to see that we are clothed in Christ!!! To be restored in our relationship with God. There is hints of this in the story between David and Jonathan. Jonathan gave David his robe, his sword, belt and bow (1Sam. 18:4). David was "cloth" in Johnathan. While David had Jonathan's clothing, it meant protection, that he was part of Jonathan's family, his blood. We have to change our entire way of looking at God's Word... we need to see that God is revealing to us that He wants to restore His relationship with us... and that changes everything. vivian | ||
| Indy4now Registered user Username: Indy4now Post Number: 948 Registered: 2-2008 |
Nowisee, In reality it was our skewed view of the OT that skewed what we could understand about the new covenant. I could understand the NC... but I couldn't understand the OC or see the shadow of it correctly because my overall paradigm of the OC was that God was trying to restore moral conduct... and the 10C's was crucial in that line of thought. After all... it was written on stone with the finger of God! ;) vivian | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 6952 Registered: 9-2006 |
Viv, Now you have it right, it's wasn't the view of the NT that was necessarily skewed, it was the view of old testament that was skewed, so when they get to Paul, he just drives them crazier than a bed bug. Ha! River | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 284 Registered: 5-2009 |
Vivian, this is really good. I'll be thinking about this for a long time. very good breakdown of the different worldviews. And I love your term "Ellenology." I think my husband has a couple of degree in that. ha! | ||
| Nowisee Registered user Username: Nowisee Post Number: 692 Registered: 5-2009 |
Yeah, reading anything written by Paul just sounded like gobbledygook to me! It just made no sense. Vivian, I am much older than you, and in the "old days", I don't ever remember being taught anything at all about the new covenant or the covenants in general, and I was quite a good little sda Bible student--I guess they talk about it now, but the definition is all wrong, at least the definitions I've read. Yes, I agree that I didn't get the OT, either. Isn't it just wonderful to study the Bible now and have it make sense?! There is SO much cool stuff to learn and it is SO intricate and beautiful. And it is now Good News! And it's all about Jesus! PS. For all of you who have not had the privilege-watch the DVD "The Star of Bethlehem" presented by Rick Larson, and you will be blown away by the awesome sovereignty of God!! | ||
| Indy4now Registered user Username: Indy4now Post Number: 950 Registered: 2-2008 |
Nowisee, In my "old days" I was not taught about the new covenant either!! I was a good student too!! I know I would have remembered something if about the new covenant if it was brought up at least once. I never knew there was a new covenant until I was 42! When we first moved out here to Indiana, I had become frustrated with the sda church we were going to because it felt like there was no Spirit there. Even as an sda, I recognized when there was NO Spirit at all. It was then that I realized that I needed to study EGW and sda doctrines. I needed to decide if the sda church was worth defending. I was talking to a Christian friend of mine and telling her what I was experiencing at the sda church. She made a comment about her experience there (the few times she had been). She said, "It feels like they're living in the old covenant and not in the new covenant." My mind started racing... what is a new covenant??? I just looked at her and said, "maybe that's it." As soon as I got home I called one of my sda friends who was also on the verge of leaving (she eventually did) and asked her if she knew what a "new covenant" was. She said "no." That was my introduction into the concept of a new covenant... God works in great ways. A simple comment... got me thinking even more. vivian | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 8828 Registered: 3-2004  |
Oh, I am celebrating a very important birthday this month. It was 7 years ago this month that the sda pastor challenged our ss class to read the NT without any help. It was 7 years ago this month I read Dirk Anderson's website about egw and told myself I could not return to that church. It was 7 years ago this month that God lifted that heavy veil off me. Thank you awesome God. Like you two ladies, I was never told about a new/old covenant, covenant with Abraham, Noah or David. I did not learn of these until I read the NT back in 2004. And I am older the you ladies. Adventism in Southern California, when I was growing up there was very historical. It has changed its face a lot since then. Diana L ps Sorry for hijacking the thread. I just did not want to start a new thread. (Message edited by Flyinglady on December 05, 2010) | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 1528 Registered: 3-2009 |
There was a Bible study series that has a couple of lessons titled, "the two laws," "the two covenants," The two laws: moral and ceremonial. The two covenants: old and new. They did explain the new covenant was actually older than the old, which in reality is true since the "new covenant" is the same given to Abraham. The only problem was that they confused it appear like it really was the 10Cs. Hec | ||
| Handmaiden Registered user Username: Handmaiden Post Number: 200 Registered: 7-2008 |
Dear Diana. Congratulations on your 7th anniversary celebrating your new life in Christ i am so happy for you and alll of us that the Lord has set free to worhip Him in Spirt and in Truth forever and ever and ever and ever. love always handmaiden | ||
| Michaelmiller Registered user Username: Michaelmiller Post Number: 182 Registered: 7-2010  |
During my entire time as a SDA I never once heard anything about the covenants taught. Michael | ||
| Karethamiller Registered user Username: Karethamiller Post Number: 128 Registered: 8-2010  |
I have to agree...I was SDA for 33 years...never truly understood that there were two covenants. My eyes have really been opened! Karetha | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12056 Registered: 12-2003  |
Absolutely. How could they teach the covenants and maintain Sabbath necessity? Even if they "saw" the covenants in Scripture, they would have to explain them away. Congratulations, Diana! Colleen | ||
| Believer247 Registered user Username: Believer247 Post Number: 211 Registered: 3-2009 |
The little bit I remember hearing about the New Covenant in my 50 plus years as SDA was that the New Covenant was the same as the Old Covenant minus the "ceremonial laws" - sacrifices. | ||
| Indy4now Registered user Username: Indy4now Post Number: 953 Registered: 2-2008 |
I think that even if Adventism was to teach that there was a new and old covenant, they would teach it from the perspective that the purpose of the old covenant was to reveal the 10C's. Think about all that is taught about the 10C's versus what is taught about the sacrifices. 10C's 1. The 10C's are like looking at a reflection of God. 2. The 10C'S are the character of God. 3. Righteousness = 10C's = God 4. The 10C's are eternal. 5. The 10C's are written by the finger of God. The sacrifices of the old covenant were insignificant compared to the revelation of the tablets. In fact, I only remember being taught that the lamb represented Christ. Of course I can't blame adventism because of my lack of knowledge... I'm just saying that the whole paradigm of the first covenant would have been skewed because no emphasis was placed on what it meant to offer a sacrificial lamb. Maybe this is only my experience... but in my experience, the revelation of the 10C's was the highlight of the first covenant and that the sacrifices were enacted as a safety net (just in case I couldn't help myself and I sinned). An Adventist's view of the old covenant is still a theology based on works. They transfer that same line of thinking to the new covenant... I can keep the law, but just in case I can't and I slip, I have Jesus who didn't quite finish His job on the cross... but He is finishing it up now. vivian | ||
| Nowisee Registered user Username: Nowisee Post Number: 699 Registered: 5-2009 |
In trying to remember what I was taught/felt about the sacrificial lamb, etc...I guess I knew it was Jesus, but, honestly, it was so vague and didn't mean much to me at all. Goes to show you what damage can be done by teaching a false gospel! I mean, I worried more about passing the IJ (overcoming my sins) than thinking about Jesus and His sacrifice--I really could not get the idea of His sacrifice as long as I believed in the IJ...what good was His sacrifice if I had to work on perfecting my character to get into heaven? | ||
| Nowisee Registered user Username: Nowisee Post Number: 703 Registered: 5-2009 |
"Then let us correct our ways, for what good will it be at the last great day to have taught and moralized men if they appear before God unsaved? If through life we have sought inferior objects and forgotten that men needed to be saved, then we will be held accountable." Commentary from a teaching about Paul's passion for the Gospel/saving souls, by Alastair Begg. I'm not familiar with this man, but I heard a fantastic teaching by him on the radio, about law and grace. Thought this tied in with Vivian's initial post re: the focus on moralizing in our previous experience. | ||
| Indy4now Registered user Username: Indy4now Post Number: 954 Registered: 2-2008 |
Nowisee... I'm saving this quote! It's exactly what I was talking about... better said and much shorter! ha! vivian | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12072 Registered: 12-2003 |
So true, Nowisee! People lose focus of Jesus and His word and gaze on morality. Morality does not require being born again. We can only see the kingdom of heaven if we are born again (John 3:3-5). Morality is a cheap imitation of living by the Spirit. Colleen |
