| Author | Message | ||
| Akweavers Registered user Username: Akweavers Post Number: 150 Registered: 8-2008 |
I was wondering if any of ya'll could tell me the sda explanation for Galatians 3. I cannot recall ever hearing that studied or read in all my years of sda life. I do remember reading it myself and doing the whole "well it must fit in somehow" thing in my head. I would like to see what they say, if anything, about what they think it means. I am guessing they use the ceremonial law vs moral law thing maybe? Also, what about 2 Cor. 3 where it acutally describes the stone tablets and how they have passed and there is a new covenant? I know I never even had read that as sda. If I did I was blind to it just like it says in verses 14 and 15 of that chapter. | ||
| Indy4now Registered user Username: Indy4now Post Number: 617 Registered: 2-2008  |
Hi Akweavers~ I can answer about 2Cor. 3. I had asked my mother about it and instead of her just answering in her own words, I was sent a copy of the SDA commentary for that chapter. The SDA commentary takes phrases from the verse and then explains it. So where Paul wrote (paraphrasing) "if the ministry that brought death, which was written and engraved in stones brought glory..." The commentary took the phrase "ministry of death" and explained it as the sacrificial system. The very next phrase it explains is "written and engraved in stones" which they said was an obvious reference to the tablets. Basically, they tried to separate the explanation so that the reader wouldn't connect that the "ministry of death" was the 10C's. They wrote that there was an "obvious reference" to the 10C's, but made no connection as to why that phrase was even in the verse. Their commentary was basically that the "ministry of death" (which was the sacrifices) came with glory. The ministry of condemnation is the OT sacrificial system to an SDA. They don't read that as being the 10C's. Hope this makes sense. My mom couldn't even explain it to me... that's why she sent the commentary! When my EGW glasses were removed, this became my favorite chapter in the Bible. ~vivian p.s. I know I discussed that whole chapter with my mom but got nowhere. Cannot remember how she or the commentary explained the end of the chapter. | ||
| Akweavers Registered user Username: Akweavers Post Number: 151 Registered: 8-2008 |
Well I can see now why my suggestion to study through Galatians for prayer meeting was always denied. I always liked reading Paul but never could get anyone else to back the idea of studying it as a group. I did however, often hear that Paul was hard to understand and if you weren't careful you would "wrestle the scriptures to your own destruction". I think that is why I would always read a little, see something that didn't fit, then stop reading. I thought I was leading myself to destruction because it put thoughts like.."Hmmm, that don't fit"...into my head. Any of ya'll ever do that when you would read Paul's writings? (Message edited by akweavers on July 04, 2009) | ||
| Animal Registered user Username: Animal Post Number: 554 Registered: 7-2008  |
I enjoy reading Paul because it is a challenge to try to grasp his picture of the Gospel. The messages of Paul are for us living today. God wants to speak to our hearts today . He will give us understanding if we persist in our Bible study. Each book of the Bible has its own unique snapshot of Gods love for his erring children. If we hang in there even in those "tough" passages, we will hear God speaking to our hearts His love for us. We need to see and hear His revelation of Himself. Dont stop studying !!! ...Animal | ||
| Bskillet Registered user Username: Bskillet Post Number: 412 Registered: 8-2008 |
Paul is at once the most explicit and straightforward of the Biblical writers, as well as the most mysterious. They mystery of it comes in that he saw the Gospel as a solid foundational fact of human existence, and thus goes much further in his pronouncement of it and his conclusions from it than Christians after him have been willing to go. Most of the history of Christendom has been a history of false teachers trying to say that Paul didn't mean the very things he certainly said. For it Paul actually meant them, most of what calls itself Christian today, isn't. |
