top of page

Forum Posts

Earthlastday
Oct 05, 2023
In Righteousness by faith
The Gospelin theBook ofGalatians. A review,by E. J. WAGGONER.OAKLAND, CAL., 1888 Reprint available from Leaves-of-Autumn Books, P. O. Box 440, Payson, AZ 85541. This letter was written at the date indicated, but for certain reasons it was thought best to delay sending it out. Chief among these reasons was the fear of seeming to act precipitately in the matter, and the desire to counsel with others of larger experience. The delay of nearly two years has given ample time to carefully review the subject again and again, and to avoid any appearance of heated controversy. It is thought best, even at this late day, to send the matter out in the form of a letter, as originally written. It will be understood, of course, that this does not purport to be an explanation of the book of Galatians; that would require a book many times the size of this. I have here endeavored merely to correct some erroneous views, so that those who read may be prepared to study the epistle to the Galatians with more profit than heretofore. MMM 51.1 It should also be stated that this little book is not published for general circulation. It is designed only for those in whose hands Elder Butler’s pamphlet on Galatians was placed, and perhaps a few others whose minds have been specially exercised on the subject. No one can be more anxious than the writer, to avoid everything of a controversial nature in matters intended for the general public. MMM 51.2 That this letter may tend to allay controversy, to help to bring the household of God into the unity of the faith as it is in Christ Jesus, and to hasten the time when the servants of God shall see eye to eye, is the only desire of the writer.E. J. W.[Selection from pp. 3-5] The Gospel in Galatians Oakland, Cal., February 10, 1887. Elder Geo. I. Butler, Battle Creek, Mich.-Dear Brother: The matter of the law in Galatians which received some attention at the late General Conference, has been upon my mind a good deal, and doubtless many have thought of it since then more than before. I very much regretted that every moment of time was so occupied that we could have no conversation upon the subject. It is true the matter was discussed to a very limited extent in the meetings of the Theological Committee, but of course the little that could be said under the circumstances was not sufficient to give any satisfaction to any party concerned. I know that you are at all times exceedingly busy, and I myself have no time to squander; but this matter is of very great importance, and has received so much attention that it cannot by any possibility be ignored now. You remember that I stated that there were some points in your pamphlet which seemed to me to indicate that you had misunderstood my position. I therefore wish to note a few of them. Before taking up any of the details, I wish to say first, that, as I assured you when in Battle Creek, I have not the slightest personal feeling in this matter. What I have written in the Signs has been with the sole design of doing good, by conveying instruction on an important Bible subject. I have not written in a controversial manner, but have particularly avoided anything of that nature. It has been my aim on this subject, as well as on others, to write in such a way as not to arouse combativeness in any, but to present simple Bible truth, so that the objections would be taken out of the way before the person could make them. Second, it is not possible that in noting a few of the points in your pamphlet I could properly present my own position. To do that I should want to take up the book of Galatians without any reference to what anybody else had said upon it. In my articles in the Signs I have mentioned only a few points that might seem to be objections to the law, and which are often quoted as showing its abolition, to show that they are really the strongest arguments for the perpetuity of the law. MMM 51.3 I wish to say also that I think great injustice has been done in the allusions that have been made to the Instructor lessons. If it were simply injustice to me, it would be a matter of small consequence. But discredit was thrown upon the lessons, which would materially weaken the influence of the important subject upon which they treated, and this too when not a text used in the lessons was given a different application from that which has been held by those at least of our people who have written upon the same subject. Every position taken in those lessons is perfectly in harmony with works published by our people, and may be read there-from. This was proved before the committee. And I have no knowledge that any different view on any text used in those lessons was ever printed by our people before the appearance of your pamphlet. This being the case, I honestly think that justice demands that on this subject at least the impressions conveyed in your pamphlet should be as publicly corrected. MMM 52.1 As to the propriety of publishing the matter in the Signs when I did, I have nothing to say. Whatever censure is due on that score, I willingly take, as I already have. But I wish to say that nothing that has been said or written has in the least degree shaken my confidence in the truthfulness of what I published in the Signs. Those positions I hold to and rejoice in to-day more strongly than ever, I wish also most earnestly to protest against the accusation that I have made the Signs, much less the Instructor, a medium for taking an unfair advantage of any of our people. Quotations that will appear further on, will show that I am not the one who has departed from the standard works of our people. MMM 52.2 I will now proceed to notice a few points in the pamphlet, taking them up in the order in which they come. On page 8 you say:- MMM 52.3 “The Lord chose Abraham and his descendants to be his peculiar people. They were such till the cross. He gave them the rite of circumcision-a circle cut in the flesh-as a sign of their separation from the rest of the human family.” MMM 52.4 This seeming misapprehension of the nature of circumcision appears throughout your pamphlet. It seems strange that it should be so, when the apostle Paul speaks so plainly concerning it. In Romans 4:11 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57164#57164)I read of Abraham: “And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised; that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also.” MMM 52.5 The fitness of this rite as a sign of righteousness will readily appear to anybody who understands the physical evils against which circumcision is a guard. At the present time it is often performed by physicians as a preventive of physical impurity. It was practiced for this purpose by many nations of antiquity. Herodotus (2:37) says of the Egyptians: “They practice circumcision for the sake of cleanliness, considering it better to be cleanly than comely.” Professor Von Orelli, of Basel, says in the Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia: “The custom is also found among nations which have no traceable connection with any form of ancient civilization; as for instance, among the Congo negroes and Caffrarians in Africa, the Salivas Indians in South America, the inhabitants of Otaheite and the Fiji Islands, etc.” He adds: “The Arabs of to-day call the operation tutûr tahir, purification.” MMM 52.6 I think that among the Jews as a class the rite exists to-day only as a preventive of physical impurity. I was present when it was performed by an eminent rabbi of San Francisco, and he said that that was all it was for. In this, as in everything else, the Jews have lost all knowledge of the spiritual meaning of their ceremonies. The veil still remains over their hearts. But that cutting off of the cause of physical impurity signified the putting off of the impurity of the heart, which was accomplished by faith in Christ. See Deuteronomy 10:16,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.10575#10575) and many other texts, for proof that circumcision had from the beginning this deeper meaning. [Selection from pp. 24- 47]means the ceremonial law, and your argument just quoted is valid, then it precludes the possibility of there being any ceremonial law in the time of Abraham; but Abraham had the essential parts of the ceremonial law, although that law had not been formally given. If you deny that Abraham had the ceremonial law, and insist that that law was not given until 430 years after his time, then I would like to ask what remedial system there was before the exode? You say that the ceremonial law was added because of transgressions, that is, as a remedial system. Then why was it not added as soon as the transgression was committed, instead of 2,500 years later? I I claim that the remedial system entered immediately after the fall, and for proof I cite you to the offering of Abel. Your argument would put off the remedial system until the exode. You may say that at that time the ceremonial law was given more formally and circumstantially than before; very good, but if that argument will apply to the ceremonial law, as it undeniably will, why will it not apply equally to the moral law? You cannot deny that the moral law was given at Sinai, although it had been known since the creation. Why was it given then? Because it had never been formally announced. So far as we know, no copy of it had ever been written, and the great mass of the people were almost totally ignorant in regard to it. You, yourself, say that Israel may have been ignorant of portions of the moral law, and this is undoubtedly true. Then there is abundant reason why it should have been given at that time,-because of transgressions. If all the people had known and obeyed the law, there would have been no necessity for its promulgation on Sinai; but because they were ignorant of its requirements, and had transgressed it, it was necessary that it should then be given as it was. But you say that it is not proper to apply the term “added” to the moral law. The Bible itself must decide that matter. In the fifth chapter of Deuteronomy Moses rehearses to the children of Israel the circumstances of the giving of law. Verses 5-21 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.10282#10282)contain the substance of the ten commandments, and of these Moses says in the twenty-second verse: “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.” The term “added,” in this verse, is in the Septuagint exactly the same as that rendered “added” in Galatians 3:19.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387) The Hebrew word is the same that is rendered “add” in Genesis 30:24.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.1742#1742) That it has unmistakable reference in Deuteronomy 5:22 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.10316#10316)to the moral law, and to that alone, no one can deny. I care not whether you render it “added,” “spoken,” or “promulgated”-it makes no difference. In Hebrews 12:18, 19 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.61666#61666)we have unmistakable reference to the voice of God speaking the law from Sinai, and the request of the people that God should not speak to them any more (Exodus 20:18, 19)(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.4213#4213), in the words, “which voice they that heard entreated that the word should not be spoken to them any more.” Here the word rendered “spoken” is the same as that rendered “added” in Galatians 3:19 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387)and Deuteronomy 5:22.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.10316#10316) If we chose we might render it, “they entreated that the word should not be added to them any more,” and then we would have a uniform rendering. Or we might render it uniformly “spoken,” and then we would read in Deuteronomy that the Lord spoke all those words in the mount, out of the midst of the fire, etc., with a great voice, “and he spoke no more;” and this would be the exact truth and a good rendering. And likewise for uniformity we might justly render Galatians 5:19,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59509#59509) “it was spoken because of transgressions.” Or we might take the word in Deuteronomy 5:22 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.10316#10316)in the same sense in which it is used in Genesis 30:24,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.1742#1742) and the same idea would appear. When Rachel said, “God shall add to me another son,” it was the same as though she had said, “God will give me another son.” So the meaning in Deuteronomy 5:22 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.10316#10316)is that after the Lord had given them the commandments recorded in the preceding verses, he gave them no more. It seems to me very reasonable to apply the term “added” to the moral law; and whether it is reasonable or not I have certainly quoted two texts besides Galatians 3:19 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387)which apply it so. But you cannot find in the Bible a single instance of the use of the word “added,” as applied to the ceremonial law, to substantiate your view on Galatians 3:19.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387) MMM 53.1 Deuteronomy 5:22 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.10316#10316)plainly says that the ten commandments were spoken by the Lord, and that nothing but the ten commandments was spoken, or given, or added. Galatians 3:19 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387)tells us why they were spoken. It was because of transgressions; that is, because people were largely ignorant of the law. We may not play upon the word “added,” and use it in a mathematical sense, but must necessarily use it in the sense of declaring or speaking. There was no more moral law after God spoke it from Sinai than there was before, but it was certainly known a great deal better than it was before, and there was less excuse for sin than there was before. In the preceding verses the apostle has spoken of the promise to Abraham, and the covenant made to him. The statement that that covenant was continued in Christ shows plainly that the covenant to Abraham confirmed the forgiveness of sins through Christ. But the forgiveness of sin necessarily implies a knowledge of sin Only the righteous can be heirs of the promise, and a knowledge of sin and righteousness can only be obtained through the moral law. Therefore the giving of the law in a more specific manner than ever before was necessary, in order that the people might be partakers of the blessings promised to Abraham. MMM 53.2 The very same thing is stated in Horn. 5:20, “Moreover, the law entered that the offense might abound;” and I never knew any Seventh-day Adventist to have any trouble in applying that to the moral law, yet it is certainly as difficult a text as Galatians 3:19.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387) The word rendered “entered” is, literally, “came in.” The revised version has it, “came in beside.” But the moral law existed before the days of Moses, as is evident from verses 13, 14 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59375#59375)of the same chapter, and also from the expression in the same verse, “that the offense might abound,” showing that sin-the transgression of the law-existed before the law came in. Although the law existed in all its force before the exode, yet it “came in,” “entered,” was spoken or given, or “added” at that time. And why? That the offense might abound, i.e., “that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful;” that what was sin before might the more plainly be seen to be sin. Thus it entered, or was added, “because of transgressions.” If it had not been for transgressions there would have been no necessity for the law to enter at Sinai. Why did it enter because of transgressions? “That the offense might abound;” in order to make sin seem greater than ever before, so that men might be driven to the super-abounding grace of God as manifested in Christ. And so it became a school-master, pedagogue, to bring men to Christ, in order that they might be justified by faith, and be made the righteousness of God in him. And so it is stated later that the law is not against the promises of God. It works in harmony with the promise, for without it the promise would be of no effect. And this most emphatically attests the perpetuity of the law. MMM 54.1 I do not care for the opinions of commentators, except as they state in a clearer form that which has already been proved from the Bible; but as you in your pamphlet seem to have placed considerable reliance upon the opinion of commentators, it may not be profitless to quote a few here. I do it, however, not because I think they add anything to the argument, but simply as an offset to your quotations, and because they possibly state the case a little more clearly than I have done. Professor Boise, in his “Critical Notes on the Greek text of Galatians,” says on this text;- MMM 54.2 “Because of the transgressions indicates, therefore, this idea, to give a knowledge of transgressions to make plainly clear and distinct what were actual transgressions of the divine requirements.” MMM 54.3 He also says:-“In keeping with this idea, and perhaps implied, is the interpretation, to restrain transgressions.” And he cites Erasmus, Olshausen, Neander, DeWette, Ewald, Luther, Bengel, and others, as holding the same view. If the opinions of commentators are to decide this matter, I think that the moral law will come out ahead. MMM 54.4 Dr. Barnes says on the expression “because of transgressions:”- “On account of transgressions, or with reference to them. The meaning is, that the law was given to show the true nature of transgression, or to show what was sin. It was not to reveal a way of justification, but it was to disclose the true nature of sin; to deter men from committing it; to declare its penalty; to convince men of it, and thus to be ‘ancillary’ to, and preparatory to, the work of redemption through the Redeemer. This is the true account of the law of God as given to apostate men, and this use of the law still exists.” And Dr. Clarke says:- “It was given that we might know our sinfulness, and the need we stood in of the mercy of God. The law is the right line, the straight edge that determines the obliquity of our conduct. See the notes on Romans 4:15,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57172#57172) and especially on Romans 5:20,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57233#57233) where this subject is largely discussed and the figure explained.” Your argument against the moral law being “added because of transgressions” will apply with equal force against the moral law having “entered that the offense might abound.” If you claim that Galatians 3:19 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387)cannot apply to the moral law, then you must claim also that Romans 5:20 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57233#57233)does not apply to that law. MMM 55.1 I quote further from your pamphlet, from the paragraph ending at the top of page 44:- MMM 55.2 “It would be absurd to suppose that this law was ‘added’ to itself. It does apply reasonably to another law, brought in because the one previously existing had been ‘violated.’ A law cannot be transgressed unless it exists; for ‘where no law is, there is no transgression.’ ” MMM 55.3 I have already shown the force of the term, “added.” I have never claimed that any law was added to itself, or that any mathematical process is referred to by the word rendered, “added.” What do you mean by saying a law cannot be transgressed until it exists? You seem to imply that the moral law did not exist so that it could be transgressed before it was given upon Mount Sinai. I know you do not believe this, and yet in another paragraph it is implied still more plainly. I will again quote Romans 5:20:(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57233#57233) “ Moreover the law entered, that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.” This law unmistakably is the moral law, yet you might say it is impossible that it should be the moral law, because offenses existed before the law here spoken of entered, and where no law is there is no transgression; and that therefore the law which here entered was some other law. But you would not argue that here. You would claim as I do, that the meaning, of the text is that the law entered, or was given, in order that sin might appear in its true enormity. As Paul elsewhere says, sin by the commandment became exceeding sinful. The moral law existed from creation, and long before. The patriarchs had a knowledge of it, and also all the antediluvians and the Sodomites, because they were counted sinners; yet it did not exist in written form, and those who were not in immediate connection with God could not have that perfect knowledge of the law which would show them the full heinousness of sin. They could know that the things which they committed were wrong, but they could not realize their full enormity; and especially was this the case when the Israelites came from Egyptian bondage. But God had made a covenant with Abraham, and had promised wonderful things, but only on condition of perfect righteousness through Christ; and if men ever attain to this perfect righteousness, they must have the law in its fullest extent, and must know that many things were sinful, which they might previously have thought were harmless. So the law entered that the offense might abound; and because the offense abounded, and men saw their depravity, they found that grace super-abounded to cover their sins. The case is so plain, and the argument in Galatians 3:19 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387)is so plainly parallel, that I marvel how anybody who has any just conception of the relation of the law and the gospel can question it for a moment. MMM 55.4 Again on page 44 I read:- “The moral law is referred to as the one transgressed. But the ‘added’ law, of which Paul is speaking, made provision fur the forgiveness of these transgressions in figure, till the real Sacrifice should be offered.” Your misapplication of the word “added” I have already sufficiently noticed, but there is an idea expressed in the quotation just made which I am sorry to see has of late been taught to some extent. And that is that in the so-called Jewish dispensation forgiveness of sins was only figurative. Your words plainly indicate that there was no real forgiveness of sins until Christ, the real Sacrifice, was offered. If that were so, I would like to inquire how Enoch and Elijah got to Heaven. Were they taken there with their sins unforgiven? Had they been in Heaven for two or three thousand years before their sins were forgiven? The very fact that they were taken to Heaven is sufficient evidence that their sins were really pardoned. When David says, “Blessed is he whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered,” he means just what Paul did when he used the same words. David said to the Lord, “Thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin.” That was no sham forgiveness. And it was expressly declared that if a soul should sin against any of the commandments of the Lord, he should offer his sacrifice and his sins should be forgiven him. Leviticus 4:2, 3, 20, 26, 31.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.5694#5694) There was no virtue in the sacrifice, which was typical, yet the pardon was as real as any that has ever been given since the crucifixion. How could this be? Simply because Christ is the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. That he should offer himself as a sacrifice, was promised to our first parents in Eden, and confirmed to Abraham by an oath from God, and therefore, by virtue of that promise, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and all who wished, could receive as much virtue from the blood of Christ as we can. That forgiveness was real is shown by the fact that Abel, by his offering, received witness that he was righteous. But there can be no righteousness that has not been preceded by forgiveness. If the pardon were figurative, then the righteousness must also have been figurative. But Abel and Noah and Abraham, and others, were really righteous; they had the perfect righteousness of faith; therefore they must have had actual forgiveness. This is further shown from the fact that forgiveness of sins must precede all righteousness. For there can be no righteousness without faith (Romans 6:23)(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57282#57282), and faith always brings pardon. Romans 3:24, 25;(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57127#57127) 5:1.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57195#57195) MMM 55.5 I quote the next paragraph of your pamphlet, page 44:- ” ‘Till the seed should come,’ limits the duration of this remedial system, beyond all question. The word ‘till,’ or ‘until,’ ever has that signification. The ‘added’ law, then, was to exist no longer than ‘till the seed should come.’ This the language unmistakably declares. Did the moral law extend no further than the full development of the Messiah? No Seventh-day Adventist will admit that. But this was precisely the case with the other law.” You say that the added law was to exist no longer than till the seed should come, because the word “till,” or “until,” has ever the signification of a certain limited duration. Let me quote you a few texts. In Psalm 112:8,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.32234#32234) I read of the good man: “His heart is established, he shall not be afraid, until he see his desire upon his enemies.” Do you think that that implies that as soon as the good man has seen his desire upon his enemies he shall be afraid? Again I read of Christ in Isaiah 42:4,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.37715#37715) “He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth.” Do you think the word “till” in this instance limits the duration of the time that Christ should not be discouraged? and does it imply that as soon as he has set judgment in the earth, he shall fail and be discouraged? The question answers itself. Once more, in Daniel 1:21(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.44397#44397) , I read: “And Daniel continued even unto the first year of King Cyrus.” Does that mean that he did not live any longer? Not by any means, for in the tenth chapter we read of a vision which was given him in the third year of Cyrus. 1 Samuel 15:35 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.15453#15453)says that “Samuel came no more to see Saul until the day of his death.” Do you think that he went to see him as soon as he died? These texts show that “till” does not necessarily limit the duration of the thing to which it is applied, and does not necessarily imply that the law ceases at the coming of the seed. The exact meaning of the term in this instance I reserve till later. MMM 56.1 I quote again from your pamphlet:- “The ‘added’ law was ‘ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.’ All agree that this ‘mediator’ was Moses, who went between God and the people. The original word for ‘ordained’ is rendered ‘promulgate’ by Greenfield, who cites this text as an illustration. Was it true that the ten commandments were ‘ordained,’ or ‘promulgated,’ ‘by angels,’ ‘in’ or ‘by the hand of Moses’? God himself spoke them with a voice that shook the earth, and wrote them with his own finger on the stone tablets. But the other law was given through angels, and written in a ‘book’ by the ‘hand of Moses.’ If the reader desires to see some of the instances where the same expression substantially is used when speaking of the ‘law of Moses,’ we refer him to Leviticus 26:46;(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.7262#7262) Numbers 4:37;(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.7688#7688) 15:22, 23,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.8489#8489) and especially Nehemiah 9:13, 14,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.25489#25489) where the distinction is clearly made between the laws which God spoke, and the ‘precepts, statutes, and laws’ given ‘by the hand of Moses.’ ” There are several points in this paragraph, and we will note them in order. First, was the ceremonial law given by angels? Those who hold as you do, say that it was, and quote Galatians 3:19 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387)as proof. But that is not competent testimony on this point, for it is the text under discussion; but, unfortunately for your theory, it is the only text that you can quote. And so the “proof” that the ceremonial law was given by angels is nothing but reasoning in a circle. Thus: You say that Galatians 3:19 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387)refers to the ceremonial law, because it speaks of a law that was “ordained by angels;” then you “prove” that the ceremonial law was spoken by angels, by quoting Galatians 3:19,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387) which you have already “proved” refers to the ceremonial law. This is not proving anything, but is simply begging the question. You started out to show that Galatians 3:19 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387)has reference to the ceremonial law, because it speaks of a law ordained by angels. In order to make that good, you ought to cite at least one other text in the Bible where it is at least implied that the angels gave the ceremonial law; but this you cannot do. MMM 57.1 Now, on the other hand, the connection of angels with the giving of the ten commandments from Sinai is most clearly marked. I first cite Psalm 68:17:(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.30402#30402) “The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels; the Lord is among them, as in Sinai, in the holy place.” Again, I refer to Deuteronomy 33:2:(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.11818#11818) “The Lord came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from Mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints [holy ones,-angels]; from his right hand went a fiery law for them.” These texts show plainly that the angels of God were on Sinai when the law was spoken. They were there evidently for a purpose, though we cannot tell what. But we have a still more emphatic testimony in Stephen’s address, Acts 7:51-53:(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.55406#55406) “Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost; as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which showed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers; who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.” The law which these wicked Jews had not kept was the moral law, which Stephen said was given “by the disposition of angels,”-the very same term that in Galatians 3:19 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387)is rendered “ordained by angels.” The word diatasso, rendered “ordain,” means, according to Liddell and Scott, “to range, ordain, establish, to set in order, draw up an army.” The word “disposition,” in Acts 7:53,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.55410#55410) is from diataxis, a noun derived from the preceding verb, and means, “disposition, arrangement, especially a drawing up of troops, order of battle.” These words have also the signification of “to decree,” to “will,” but the former signification seems to convey the idea of the words as used in the texts quoted. MMM 57.2 The text under consideration does not say that the angels spoke the law, and we know very well that they did not speak either the moral or the ceremonial law. The Lord himself spoke them both, the one directly to the people, and the other to Moses. But the angels were there, evidently in their regular order, as the armies of Heaven. Just what part they had to act no one can tell, for the Bible does not specify. All I claim is that the Scriptures speak of them as being intimately connected with the giving of the moral law; while there is not a text in the Bible which mentions them in connection with the giving of the ceremonial law; and the text in Acts, already quoted, plainly says of the moral law that it was given “by the disposition of angels.” The expression “ordained by angels,” is the one upon which those who argue for the ceremonial law in Galatians, have placed their principal reliance; but even that is against them. MMM 57.3 Second, the distinction which is made between the moral and the ceremonial law, namely, that the moral law was spoken by the Lord, and the ceremonial law by Moses, will not hold. The very texts which you cite are against this distinction. I will take the first one, Leviticus 26:46.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.7262#7262) It reads: “These are the statutes and judgments and laws, which the Lord made between him and the children of Israel in Mount Sinai by the hand of Moses.” This is the last verse of the chapter. The first two verses of the chapter read thus: “Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it; for I am the Lord your God. Ye shall keep my Sabbaths, and reverence my sanctuary; I am the Lord.” And then the chapter goes on with instructions to keep the commandments of the Lord, to walk in his statutes, tells what judgments shall come upon them if they break the commandments, especially the Sabbath, and closes with the words first quoted. But in all the chapter there is not a shadow of a reference to the ceremonial law. MMM 57.4 Your next reference, Numbers 4:37,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.7688#7688) has no reference to either the moral or the ceremonial law. It simply states that Moses and Aaron numbered the families of the Kohathites, “according to the commandment of the Lord by the hand of Moses.” MMM 58.1 Your third reference, Numbers 15:22, 23,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.8489#8489) has unmistakable reference to the moral law, and to that alone, as will be seen if the twenty-fourth, twenty-fifth, and twenty-sixth verses are read in connection. I will quote them: “And if ye have erred, and not observed all these commandments, which the Lord hath spoken unto Moses, even all that the Lord hath commanded you by the hand of Moses, from the day that the Lord commanded Moses, and henceforward among your generations; then it shall be, if ought be committed by ignorance without the knowledge of the congregation, that all the congregation shall offer one young bullock for a burnt-offering.... And the priest shall make an atonement for all the congregation of the children of Israel, and it shall be forgiven them; for it is ignorance; and they shall bring their offering, a sacrifice made by fire unto the Lord, and their sin-offering before the Lord, for their ignorance; and it shall be forgiven all the congregation of the children of Israel.” All this atoning sacrifice was to be made on account of sins against what the Lord commanded by the hand of Moses. But nothing is sin except violation of the ten commandments. MMM 58.2 Your last reference, Nehemiah 9:13, 14,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.25489#25489) may have reference to both the moral and the ceremonial law. I will quote the verses: “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; and madest known unto them thy holy Sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant.” This is the only text of all to which you have referred, which even by implication refers to the ceremonial law. And it is certainly a strained implication that limits “by the hand of Moses” to the last part of verse 14.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.25491#25491) All the other texts, at any rate, when they refer to any law at all, refer solely to the moral law, which is said to have been commanded “by the hand of Moses.” MMM 58.3 You will perhaps say that I have broken down the distinction between the moral and the ceremonial law, and have opened the way for the enemies of the law to confuse the two. But I have not. I have simply quoted the texts to which you refer, and have shown their exact application. There is no chance for confusion concerning the two laws, for we have this plain distinction: The moral law was spoken by the Lord with an audible voice, from the fire and smoke of Sinai. The ten commandments are all that were given in this manner (Deuteronomy 5:22)(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.10316#10316), and they alone were written on tables of stone by the finger of God. The ceremonial law was given in a more private manner. This certainly forbids any confusion. Both the moral and the ceremonial law, however, are, as we have seen in the texts quoted, said to have been given by the hand of Moses, and both were written in the book of the law. But there is still this distinction, that the ceremonial law was written only in the book, while the moral law was written on the tables of stone, with the finger of God, and also in a book. That the term, “the law of Moses,” does sometimes refer to the ten commandments, will be evident to anyone who will carefully read Deuteronomy 4:44 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.10261#10261)to 5:22 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.10316#10316)and onward; Joshua 23:6, 7;(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.13151#13151) 1 Kings 2:3, 4;(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.17853#17853) 2 Kings 23:24, 25,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.20729#20729) etc. See also “Great Controversy”, vol. 2, pp. 217, 218, beginning with last paragraph on page 217. On the other hand, the term “the law of the Lord” is applied to the ceremonial ordinances For instance, see Luke 2:23, 24.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.51012#51012) Thus the terms, “the law of Moses,” and “the law of the Lord,” are used interchangeably of both laws. MMM 58.4 Third, you say of the latter part of Galatians 3:19,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387) that all agree that this mediator was Moses. I do not agree; and I do not think that the text and the context warrant such an assumption. The apostle continues in the next verse: “Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.” Now I turn to 1 Timothy 2:5,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.60620#60620) and read: “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” God is one party in the transaction, and Christ is the mediator. I suppose you will not question the statement that Christ was the one who spoke the ten commandments from Mount Sinai. In “Great Controversy,” vol. 2, page 217 (concerning the sermon on the mount), I read: “The same voice that declared the moral and the ceremonial law, which was the foundation of the whole Jewish system, uttered the words of instruction on the mount.” And this is indicated in the text under consideration, and also in Acts 7:38,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.55380#55380) where Stephen says of Moses: “This is he that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the Mount Sina, and with our fathers.” That angel we all understand to be the one that spoke to Moses out of the bush, the one that went before the children of Israel, in whom was the name of God, being none other than our Lord Jesus Christ. If I thought it necessary I could give you plenty of Scripture testimony on this point. And so the text under consideration, as I have proved in noting your points, teaches that the law was given upon Mount Sinai, because of transgression, that is, that the people might know what sin was, and might appreciate the pardon that was offered in the covenant to Abraham; and that it was thus given till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and the apostle shows the dignity and the value of the law, by the statement that it was disposed, or arranged, or ordained, by angels, in the hand of our great mediator, the Lord Jesus Christ. MMM 58.5 I will now give a little attention to the expression, “till the seed should come to whom the promise was made,” and show how it harmonizes with the other expressions in the verse as I have explained them. First, I will quote a reference which you make to that. You say:- MMM 59.1 “Another argument, a very late invention, designed to avoid the conclusion that the ‘added’ law terminated at the cross, we briefly notice. It is the claim that ‘the seed’ has not yet come, and will not come till the second advent of Christ. It would be hard for the writer to really think that any believer in Christ would take that position, had we not read it in our own beloved The Signs of the Times, July 29, 1886.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/820.7350#7350)”-P. 46. MMM 59.2 If this had been written by some men I should think it was deliberate misrepresentation; for it certainly does wofully misrepresent the view which I take and have published. I have carefully re-read my articles to see if by any unfortunate expression I had conveyed the idea that Christ, the promised seed, has not yet come, and I find no hint of such an idea. I have not, however, the slightest thought that you would willfully misrepresent any person, and I can only attribute your failure to state my position properly, to a too hasty perusal of it. It is not at all surprising to me that in the little time which you had to spare, burdened at the same time with a multitude of cares to distract your mind, you did not grasp the whole of the argument, especially as it was one to which your mind had not been previously directed. But although your misrepresentation was unintentional, it does none the less convey an erroneous impression of my teaching. MMM 59.3 The argument which I put forth is not so late an invention as you think. I have held the view for several years, and it was not original with me. But even if it were entirely new, that in itself would be nothing against it; for “every scribe which is instructed into the kingdom of Heaven, is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old.” Matthew 13:52.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.48167#48167) MMM 59.4 It is true that I held, and still hold, that the coming of the seed spoken of in Galatians 3:19,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387) means the second coming of Christ; but that does not imply that Christ has not already come, or that he is not now the seed. You often preach that the Lord is coming, and you no doubt quote such texts of Scripture as Psalm 50:3, 4;(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.29892#29892) 1 Corinthians 4:5,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57991#57991) and scores of others. Now if a man hearing you preach such a sermon, should go off and say that you did not believe that the Lord came 1,800 years ago, he would be no more out of the way than you are in saying that I have taught that Christ has not come. In the Old Testament we have many references to the coming of Christ; some of them mean his first advent, and some his second. The only way we can distinguish between them is by the events mentioned in connection with the references to the coming. And so we must decide here in Galatians 3:19.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387) MMM 59.5 There is only one ground on which you can claim that the coming of the seed cannot refer to the second coming of Christ, and that is by claiming that he will not be the seed then; that he is the seed only at the first advent. But such a claim cannot stand for a moment, for Christ is as surely the seed when he bruises the serpent’s head, as when he himself was bruised. He will be the seed when the promise is fulfilled to him. The matter, then, stands just this way: Christ is the seed; therefore to say, “till the seed should come,” is equivalent to saying, “till Christ should come.” Then the next point is, does the expression, “the coming of Christ,” necessarily apply to the first advent alone? Certainly it does not, for there are two advents, and the simple expression, “the coming of Christ,” may apply to either. Therefore, so far as the expression, “till the seed should come,” is concerned, there is no reason why it should not apply to the second advent as well as to the first. Indeed, we might say that there is an antecedent probability that it should refer to the second coming of Christ, for that is the more prominent coming of the two, and it is the one which we always think of when the expression is unqualified. But in every case of this kind, the context must decide what coming is referred to. MMM 60.1 The application of Galatians 3:19 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387)to the first advent of Christ arises largely, I think, from a careless reading of it. You argue as though it read, “till the seed should come of whom the promise was made.” But it is, “till the seed should come to whom the promise was made.” The apostle is not dealing with the idea that the seed was promised to Abraham, but he is speaking of the promise that was made to Abraham and to his seed, the seed being Christ. Now if you can find a single promise that was fulfilled to Christ at his first advent, there will be some show of reason in applying Galatians 3:19 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387)to the first advent of Christ. But you cannot. There was absolutely nothing that Christ then received; no part of the promise was fulfilled to him. He received only rebuffs, reproaches, mockings, poverty, weariness, scourging, and death. Moreover, the promise “to Abraham and his seed” is a joint promise; but certainly no promise was fulfilled to Abraham at the first advent of Christ, for Abraham had then been dead 2,000 years. MMM 60.2 That the apostle connects the coming of the seed with the fulfillment of the promise to him, is evident from the simple reading of the text. A certain promise had been made to Abraham and his seed, and a certain thing was given for a special purpose, until the seed to whom the promise was made should come. The idea that inevitably follows from the reading of the text, letting each clause have its proper weight, is that at the coming referred to, the seed will inherit the promise. I shall give something more on this point a little further on. MMM 60.3 But there is no need of any conjecture as to what the promise is which is referred to in this verse. The eighteenth verse reads thus: “For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise;” and then the nineteenth verse continues: “Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made.” This shows most conclusively that the promise referred to is the inheritance. This promised inheritance is the whole world (Romans 4:13)(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57168#57168); and there is no need of presenting argument to show that the inheritance is still future. Christ has not received it, for we are joint heirs with him; and when he receives it, Abraham and all those who are his children through faith, will likewise receive it. And this makes of no value your argument that “the promises to this seed, many of them, reach beyond the second advent,-as does this one [Isaiah 9:6, 7](https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.36384#36384),-even into eternity. So, according to this reasoning, we may wait to all eternity for the seed to come.” That argument, if it proved anything in this connection, would simply prove that the promise to Abraham and to his seed will never be fulfilled, which is contrary to the word of God. But, as we have seen, there are not many promises referred to in this nineteenth verse, but only the one promise,-the inheritance, and that promised inheritance will be received at the second coming of Christ, and not before. MMM 60.4 But you say that even this promise is not fulfilled till the end of the thousand years, and that therefore if the coining of the seed is not till the fulfillment of the promise, “the seed cannot come till the end of the one thousand years; for the land is not inherited by Abraham till that time.” This argument might indeed be called a “late invention.” I am certain it is a new one among our people. It is true that the saints do not dwell on the earth till the close of the one thousand years, but it is not true that they do not possess it, or inherit it, till that time. If they do not, then what does Christ mean in Matthew 25:31 34,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.49075#49075) where he says that when becomes in his glory and all the holy angels with him, he shall sit upon the throne of his glory, shall separate the righteous from the wicked, and shall say to the righteous, “Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” The mistake into which you fall is in supposing that the saints cannot possess the earth till they dwell upon it. If that were true, it would apply equally to Christ, that he cannot possess it until he dwells upon it; but we read, in Psalm 2:8, 9,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.28408#28408) these words of the Father to the Son: “Ask of me, and 1 shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession; thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.” We learn from this, as well as from Revelation 11:15-19,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.63021#63021) and other texts, that Christ receives the kingdom just before he comes to this earth. And it is not until after the uttermost parts of the earth are given to him for his possession, that he dashes the nations in pieces like a potter’s vessel. If Christ did not possess the earth, he would not have the right to do this. The wicked subjects of Satan now claim possession of the earth, which has been promised to Christ. When that promise is fulfilled, and the earth is given into his possession, then he will rid it of those who have usurped dominion. He inherits the earth while the wicked are still upon it, but he cannot dwell upon it until they are removed. We say he cannot dwell upon it, not because he has not the power, but because he cannot take up his abode upon it while it is so impure. The fact, however, that he does with the nations according to his will, rooting them out of the earth, shows that the earth is in his possession. MMM 60.5 This same argument applies to the saints. They are joint heirs with Christ. This means that they receive their inheritance at the same time he does. When he comes to this earth, having received his kingdom, he calls them to inherit it with him. They do not at once dwell upon the earth, but they dwell in its capital, the New Jerusalem, and possession of the capital of any kingdom is usually considered as evidence of the possession of the kingdom itself. Moreover, the saints during the thousand years sit upon thrones, judging the wicked, and determining the amount of punishment that shall be given to them. Thus they are sharers with Christ in the work of ridding their common possession of its incumbrances. It is just as though you and I should be joint heirs of a farm. At a certain time we are given possession, but we find that it is entirely overrun with thorns and briars; and so before we take up our abode upon it, we clear off this growth of rubbish and burn it up. The wicked are the tares that cumber the farm that is promised to Abraham and his seed; when Abraham and his seed shall be given possession, they will clear it of this foul growth, and then will dwell upon it. This brief argument shows clearly, what I thought was already established among us, namely, that Christ and the saints possess the kingdom when he comes the second time. MMM 61.1 Having settled these points, namely, that the “promise” means the inheritance of the earth, and that this promise to Abraham and his seed is fulfilled at Christ’s second coming, we are prepared to go on. The prominent idea in this chapter is by what means the promise is to be obtained. The promise is the uppermost thought in this verse. The apostle is showing that the inheritance is gained solely by faith, that it is not of the law, but of faith in the promise, and then he carries us down to the time when the promise shall be fulfilled. That the “coming” that is referred to is the second coming of Christ, when the promise shall be fulfilled, is a most natural and easy conclusion, and makes harmony of the text. I think you overlooked a parallel text which I quoted in my articles. It is Ezekiel 21:26, 27:(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.42792#42792) “Thus saith the Lord God: Remove the diadem, and take off the crown; this shall not be the same; exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high. I will overturn, overturn, overturn it; and it shall be no more until he come right it is; and I will give it him.” Here we have unmistakable reference to the seed, in the words, “he whose right it is.” And it is plainly declared that when “He whose right it is.” And it is plainly declared that when “He whose right it is.” Comes, to the inheritance will to given him. These words were written nearly six hundred years before Christ’s first advent, yet is not necessary for me to enter into an argument to convince you that the first advent of Christ is not referred to here. In Galatians 3:19 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387)Paul is speaking of the inheritance and says, “till the seed should come to whom the promise was made;” in the text just quoted from Ezekiel, the prophet is speaking also of the inheritance and says, “till He come whose right it is.” Now why is it any more absurd to say that the first expression refers to the second coming of Christ, than to say that the second refers to that event? MMM 61.2 If you say that the coming of the seed has no reference to the second advent, because when the coming spoken of takes place the ceremonial law is to terminate, you beg the question entirely. If you say, as you do in your pamphlet, that applying that coming to the second advent, and the law which is spoken of to the moral law, would make the moral law terminate at the second coming of Christ, I have already answered that, for I have shown that “till” does not of necessity mean “termination.” I believe most emphatically that the law referred to is the moral law, and that the coming of the seed is the second advent of Christ, but I do not believe that the moral law is going to terminate when Christ comes; and Galatians 3:19 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387)does not indicate that it will. MMM 62.1 In order to establish your point, that the coming of the seed cannot refer to the second advent of Christ, it would be necessary for you to show that Christ was the seed only at the first advent, and that he is not the seed since then. But Genesis 3:15 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.147#147)says not only that the serpent should bruise the heel of the seed (at the first advent), but that the seed should bruise the serpent’s head (at the second advent) When Christ comes the second time he is still the seed. So when Paul says, “till the seed comes,” it need no more be confined to the first advent than when he says, “till the Lord comes.” MMM 62.2 Lest it should be objected that Christ does not bruise Satan’s head at his second coming, but only after the close of the 1,000 years, I will remind you that the wicked are not punished until after the close of the 1,000 years; yet they are said to be punished at the coming of, the Lord. And go they are; for the second advent, like the first, covers a period of time. The first advent of Christ covered all the time of his earthly ministry; the second advent covers all the time from the appearance of “the sign of the son of man in heaven,” until the wicked are destroyed out of the earth. MMM 62.3 The argument thus far on the coming of the seed has been negative in order to meet some of your objections. I will now give some positive argument that the coming referred to is the second advent. In doing this I shall also proceed to consider verses 22-25,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59393#59393) for they have an intimate connection with verse 19.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387) Verses 24, 25 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59397#59397)read thus: “Wherefore the law was our school-master to bring us unto Christ, that might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a school-master.” By no manner of reasoning whatever can there verses be made to apply to the ceremonial law. The reference must be to the moral law, and to that alone, as I shall show. MMM 62.4 1. The text does not read that the law was our school-master to point us to Christ; if it did there might be some show of reason in applying it to the ceremonial law. But “the law was our school-master to bring us to Christ,” or, “the law was our school-master unto Christ,” that is, the law was our school-master till we came to Christ. Now the ceremonial law brought no one to Christ. The performance of it was an act of faith on the part of the performer showing the belief he already had in Christ. MMM 62.5 2. Faith did not release people from the observance of the ceremonial law; on the contrary, the person did not begin the observance of the ceremonial law until he had faith in Christ. MMM 62.6 3. The twenty-second verse says that “before faith came, we were kept under the law;” but before faith came, people did not have anything to do with the ceremonial law. MMM 62.7 4. If the ceremonial law were referred to in this verse, then, according to verse 25,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59399#59399) we should conclude that as soon as people learned to have faith in Christ they had nothing more to do with the ceremonial law; but the truth is that the patriarchs and prophets were most punctual in their observance of the ceremonial law, and no one had more faith than they. Take the case of David; his writings abound with references to sacrifices and to ceremonies in the court of the Lord’s house. He offered multitudes of sacrifices, yet there is no writer in the Bible who shows a more perfect knowledge of Christ, or who exhibits more faith in him. MMM 62.8 5. But you Bay that the apostle is reasoning of dispensations, and not of individual experiences, and that bringing them to Christ means bringing them to his first advent, and “to the system of faith there inaugurated.” But that is the weakest position you could take, for if that were the meaning, then it would follow that the law accomplished its purpose only for the generation that lived at Christ’s first advent. No other people ever came to Christ, in the sense in which you use the term. In order for the law to bring men to Christ, in the sense in which you apply it, that is, to his first advent, it would have had to lengthen their lives. Adam would have had to live at least 4,000 years. For, let me again repeat: The text does not say that the law was a schoolmaster to point men to Christ, but to bring them to him. MMM 63.1 6. Again; the text says it brings men to Christ, that they may be justified by faith. Are people justified by faith in a national capacity. I have just shown that, according to the theory that the apostle is arguing of dispensations, only one generation was brought to Christ, namely, the generation that had the good fortune to live at his first advent; but even that generation was not justified by faith. Very few of them had any faith whatever. They didn’t have any faith from first to last. Then they most have remained under the school-master,-the law,-and indeed they did. Justification by faith is an individual, and not a national, matter. Seventh-day Adventists often speak of the great light which “we as a people” possess. But “we as a people” will derive no benefit from that light unless we as individuals possess it in our own hearts. I repeat, justification by faith is something that each individual must experience for himself. Thousands who lived at Christ’s first advent knew nothing of this experience, while thousands who lived long before he came, were actually brought to Christ for pardon, and they received it. Abel was counted righteous through faith; Noah was heir of the righteousness which is by faith; and Abraham actually saw Christ’s day, and rejoiced in it, although he died 2,000 years before the first advent. And this most positively proves that the apostle, in the third chapter of Galatians, is speaking of individual experience, and not of dispensational changes. There can be no Christian experience, no faith, no justification, no righteousness, that is not an individual matter. People are saved as individuals, and not as nations. MMM 63.2 A word of explanation may be in place right here. The term “under the law,” if it be applied to the ceremonial law, cannot have the same meaning that it does when applied to the moral law. When used with reference to the moral law, it means “condemned by the law;” but it cannot have that meaning if it should be applied to the ceremonial law, because that law condemned nobody. So with the supposition that the expression refers to the ceremonial law, we must conclude that not to be under it means not to be subject to it; but when we refer it to the moral law, we come to no such conclusion, because “under the law” means condemned by the law. MMM 63.3 7. The strongest argument against the ceremonial law view is found in verse 24:(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59397#59397) “Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.” Now it is an undeniable fact that the possession of faith led to the offering of sacrifices, and not the offering of sacrifices to faith. “By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain.” Now I ask, How could the ceremonial law lead a man to that which he already had Since it was faith that prompted Abel and all others to offer sacrifices, how can it be said that those sacrifices served as a school-master to lead them to Christ that they might be justified by faith? MMM 63.4 I have already noticed your idea that the word “faith” is here synonymous with “Christ;” that the apostle means that before Christ came we were kept under the law; that the law was our school-master to bring us unto (the first advent of) Christ, that we might lie justified by him; and that verse 25 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59399#59399)means that after Christ is come we are no longer under a schoolmaster. I believe that this is the position that is usually taken by those who hold the ceremonial law view, and it is the only position that can be taken if the ceremonial law is referred to. The only thing that it lacks is proof. There is no warrant whatever for making the term “faith” synonymous with Christ. Besides, if that were true, then the text would teach that no man was justified until Christ’s first coming, which is preposterous and unscriptural. For this reason we must conclude that the ceremonial law is not under consideration in this verse. MMM 63.5 It is evident that verses 19, 24 (https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.59387#59387)are closely related, that is, when the law entered, or was added, it was in the capacity of a pedagogue, to bring men to Christ. Now to abolish the law before it has brought to Christ all who can be induced to come to him, would certainly be an act of injustice. The law must retain its office of pedagogue or task-master, until all have come to Christ who will, and this will not be until probation closes and the Lord comes. In its office as pedagogue, it is not against the promise, but works in harmony with it. Thus: God made the promise to Abraham that he and his seed should inherit the earth. This promise was made to Abraham, not because of his inherent righteousness, but because of his faith, which was accounted to him for righteousness. The promise was confirmed in Christ, that is, none but those who exercised faith in Christ for the forgiveness of their sins could be heirs of the promise. But forgiveness of sins depends upon repentance of sin, and repentance of sin presupposes a knowledge of sin, and a knowledge of sin e in be obtained only by the law. Therefore the law acts as a pedagogue, overseer, or task-master, to overwhelm men with a sense of their sin, the they may flee to Christ to be justified by faith. And this office it must perform until all those who can be influenced to come to Christ have come, and the promise is fulfilled. Then the law will no longer have the capacity of a task-master. God’s people will all be righteous, walking in the law, and the law will be in their hearts. They will not then need the law written in books or on tables of stone-that is, the added law-because they will have direct access to the throne of God, and will all be taught of God. Thus the law was added, or spoken to be a pedagogue to bring men to Christ; but when all who are worth saving have been brought to Christ, it will cease to have that capacity. But this no more implies the abolition of the law when the Lord comes, than the fact that the law entered at Sinai implies that there was no law before. There was just as much law before it was spoken upon Mount Sinai and written out for the benefit of mankind, as there is to-day. And when the law shall cease to be a pedagogue, because it has brought to Christ all who can be induced to come, and all earthly copies of the law shall have been destroyed with the earth, the law will still exist-the foundation of the throne of God, unchanged to all eternity as it has from all eternity. MMM 64.1 Perhaps the following from the pen of Elder J. N. Andrews may be considered worthy of perusal. It is from his reply to H. E. Carver, in The Review and Herald, September 16, 1851 (vol. 2, No. 4):- MMM 64.2 “The idea that the law is our school-master to bring us to Christ, that we maybe justified by faith, is often urged as proof that the law is abolished. How is the law our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ? We answer, It shows our guilt and just condemnation, and that we are lost without a Saviour. Here the apostle Paul, who was converted since the time when it is said the law was abolished, ‘had not known sin but by the law.’ Romans 7:7.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57297#57297) ‘By the law is the knowledge of sin.’ Romans 3:20.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57119#57119) Read a full account of Paul’s experience in this school, also his deliverance from the carnal mind, which ‘is not subject to the law of God.’ Romans 7:7-25;(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57297#57297) 8:1-7.(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57336#57336) The instruction of the law is absolutely necessary, for without it we can never know our guilt in the sight of God. It shows our just condemnation, its penalty hangs over our heads; we find ourselves lost, and fly to Jesus Christ. What does he do to save us from the curse of the law? Does he abolish the law that he may save its transgressors? He assures us that he did ‘not come to destroy’ it; and we know that the law being ‘holy, just, and good,’ cannot be taken back, without destroying the government of Him who gave it. Does the Saviour modify its character, and lessen its demands? Far from it. He testifies that ‘one jot [End of selection] MMM 64.3 [Selection from pp. 70, 71]the beautiful harmony between it and the gospel. The law of God is the groundwork of all our faith. It may be said to be the backbone of the Third Angel’s Message. That being the case, we must expect, as we approach the end, that all the forces of the enemy will be concentrated upon it. We shall have to do more valiant service for it than we ever yet have done. Every point in our argument will have to be subjected to the test of the most rigid criticism, and we shall have to fortify every point, It there is any inconsistency in any of our arguments, we may be sure that the enemies of the truth will not always remain blind to it. I know you will say that it will be a humiliating thing to modify our portion on so vital a point as this, right in the face of the enemy. But if a general has a faulty position, I submit that it is better to correct it, even in the face of the enemy, than to run the risk of defeat because of his faulty position. But I do not see anything humiliating in the matter. If our people should to-day, as a body (as they will sometime), change their view on this point, it would simply be an acknowledgment that they are better informed today than they were yesterday, it would simply be taking an advance step, which is never humiliating except to those whose pride of opinion will not allow them to admit that they can be wrong. It would simply be a step nearer the faith of the great Reformers from the days of Paul to the days of Luther and Wesley. It would be a step closer to the heart of the Third Angel’s Message. I do not regard this view which I hold as a new idea at all. It is not a new theory of doctrine. Everything that I have taught is perfectly in harmony with the fundamental principles of truth which have been held not only by our people, but by all the eminent reformers. And so I do not take any credit to myself for advancing it All I claim for the theory is, that it is consistent, because it sticks to the fundamental principles of the gospel. MMM 65.1 Before I close, I cannot refrain from expressing my regret to see in your book (on page 78) the expression, “The much-vaunted doctrine, of justification by faith.” Do you know of any other means of justification? Your words seem to intimate that you think that doctrine has been overestimated. Of one thing I am certain, and that is, that those who have held to the theory of the law, which you are endeavoring to uphold, have not overestimated the doctrine of justification by faith; because that theory leads inevitably to the conclusion that men are justified by the law. But when I read Romans 3:28,(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.57135#57135) and read also that Paul knew nothing among the Corinthians but Jesus Christ and him crucified, and that “the just shall live by faith,” and that “ this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith” (1 John 5:4)(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.62485#62485), and that Paul wanted to be found when Christ comes, having nothing but “the righteousness which is of God by faith” (Philippians 3:9)(https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/1965.60019#60019), I conclude that it is impossible to overestimate the overestimate the doctrine of justification by faith. You may call it a “much-vaunted” doctrine if you please; I accept the word, and say with Paul: “God forbid that I should glory [or vaunt], save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.” MMM 65.2 Hoping that you will read this letter in the spirit in which it is written, and that you will believe that I have written it with only the utmost good-feeling and brotherly love for you personally, and praying that God will guide both us and all his people to the most perfect knowledge of the truth as it is in Jesus, I remain your brother in Christ, E. J. Waggoner.
0
0
4
Earthlastday
Apr 01, 2023
In BIble prophecy
How do we know what 1 day is in prophecy? When we go do Daniel 9 Gabriel says that from Jerusalem rebuilt to Messiah or Jesus anointed of baptised is 69 Weeks . DA 9 24 'Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.' If we take Jerusalem rebuilt in 457 bc and add 69 weeks we arrive to just a few years later. The question is was Jesus baptised around 450 bc. No This does not make sense . Then the only sensible conclusion is that a day cannot be a year . As it cannot fit bible prophecy . But when we take one day for a year principle which fits all prophecies . We find out that taking Jerusalem rebuilt in 457 bc we add 69 weeks BY 7 which is 483 years We arrive to year 27 when Jesus was baptised . Also when Gabriel says keep this book for it is for the end of time. Then one day cannot be one literal day . DA 12 4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased....6 And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders? 7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished. ...8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? 9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.' Here we see that the prophecies of the book of Daniel refer to the end of time. So the days cannot be days but years . As the 1260 days refer to the reign of the antichrist . Did the antichrist reign 1260 days ? No The 2300 days when Jesus would enter the most holy place does it mean that 2300 days after Jerusalem was rebuild in 457 Jesus entered the most holy place,? No as Jesus was not yet born ? So we see that the day year principle given by God to William Miller is valid and is the only correct day interpretation in bible prophecy . NU 14 34 'After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years, and ye shall know my breach of promise.' EZ 4 6 'And when thou hast accomplished them, lie again on thy right side, and thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days: I have appointed thee each day for a year. '
1
0
5
Earthlastday
Mar 16, 2023
In Bible study
Jesus said Father i to your hands i commit my spirit But 2 days later Jesus said to Mary Touch me not for I Al not yet ascended to my Father How could Jesus go to heaven and say He did not go to heaven ? It is because the spirit is not alive without the body The light bulb withiut electricity does not make electricity Electricity without the light bulb does not make light Both need to be together to make light The body with the Spirit and the spirit without the body are not alive Jesus said Lazarus is dead How could someone be dead and people teach he went to heaven ! It is because modern christianity has accepted pagan beliefs of immortality of the soul Paul said i prefer to be with the Lord and depart from this body But did Paul says he was going to heaven as soon as he died ? As in 1 th Paul says at the last day at the last trump the dead in Christ shall rise this mortal shall put on immortality and this corruptible will out on i corruption So we see clearly that Paul did not teach he was going to heaven as soon as he died To be with the Lord I'll be when people are raised from the grave at the second coming
1
0
5
Earthlastday
Mar 13, 2023
In Righteousness by faith
These are 2 groups that Jesus describes the called and the chosen But in the parable given we see that the called do not enter heaven Let us read the verse Matthew 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen. Why do the called not enter heaven ? if we read the cl text it says because they did not have a wedding garment . Then they were thrown in outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth . But why would God call some people YL send them to hell ? In fact they chose to not accept Jesus righteousness They preferef to believe they were good and did not need Gods help But nobody can enter in heaven with their own righteousness Our own works are of no value to gain anything We work because we love . The called are all christians who heard the Holy Spirit s call on their lives The chosen are those who also has e accepted Jesus righteousness and have rejected any belief in any of men's goodness and righteousness
1
0
9
Earthlastday
Mar 13, 2023
In Righteousness by faith
Let us read this verse Matthew 22:12-13 And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless. Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Did Jesus here ask to know of the person was a Christian or not ? no What did Jesus ask ? Jesus asked to know if the person had a wedding garment So we see that the condition for entering heaven is not being a Christian or not The condition to enter heaven is not do you belong to a church ? As we see Jesus is not asking and saying all church members will enter heaven Jesus says does the person has the wedding garment What does have f a wedding garment mean ? it means does the person realize they are sinners ? Does the person realize their good works will mkt help them to enter heaven ? Do they understand that of they work they do it because they love me and not to gain anything Do they i decretando that if they work to gain heaven they have selfish motives and this will not enter heaven ? What is the wedding garment ? it is the righteousness of Jesus How do we obtain it ? by faith asking for it everyday What would keep you to ask God now to give you his righteousness now ? What would keep you from accepting Jesus in your heart now? Father please forgive my sins and take me to heaven in the name of Jesus amen
1
0
4
Earthlastday
Aug 12, 2022
In Natural health
Your skin is the biggest organ in the body . Your skin eliminates and absorbs. Your skin health depends a lot upon which food and lifestyle you will have . How to have better skin naturally? Can you sleep at anytime and eat anything and have amazing skin ? How does the body have nice looking skin? How to have better skin naturally? Elimination This is the most important thing in health it is elimination . We always talk to people who are not well to take this and take that. But the body needs much more to not do anything to be well . It is not to say that taking herbs and supplements of juicing will not help this is extremely important also . But cleansing the body is what most people do not know really helps them get better. If you work in a restaurant and the thrash is not taken out what will you do ? It will come a time when you will not be able to work . There will come a item when even the good food will be contaminated by the old food in the thrash and the garbage around . How to have better skin naturally? Cleanse your body . This body cleansing is not a one time thing . Sometimes people think o i am going to fast a few days then i am going to juice it will cleanse my colon once for all . No this is a process for a lifetime . This is why this is no important and not taught . If this process would be taught so many people would be feeling much better. This is not to say that you need to cleanse your colon constantly . But regularly , like once a month . How to have better skin naturally? Fasting this is a practice that we do not like until we understand how powerful it is to cleanse the body . Fasting is not stopping to eat. We stop eating food from the outside for a time, but the body starts eating food from the inside . The bad cells, the toxins, the ugly things that are found in your body are eaten up when you fast. One day fasting is good, intermittent fasting is amazing , it is eating few times a day and leaving the rest of the day without food. For exempli you can eat fro 6 to 8 pm, then you do not eat anything until 6 pm the next day . This Wil be a great benefit to many people . It is not a one size fits all . Consult your physician before starting any fast or any changes. How to have better skin naturally? Raw food Raw food is an amazing way for you to have nice skin . How to have better skin naturally? Cooked food is dead food as the nutrients are gone from cooked food.. Raw food is called live food, raw food will help you a lot to ss an amazing difference in our skin . This can make you look ten years younger. It is incredible to see the difference in someone who stops eating meat or starts fasting or eats a lot more raw food. Raw food is where the power is , raw food is where your body Wil start to live again and receive a lot of nutrients that it loves to convert into good blood . Raw fond has a lot of fibres, this Wil also help you cleanse your body and colon . How to have better skin naturally? Raw food is one of the key . Fasting is incredible to look younger and much more alive . After fasting some of the toxins and putrefying elements that have lingered in your body Wil be gone . And you will look much better How to have better skin naturally? No more meat I have seen wonders with people who do not eat meat any more. This also can make you look ten years younger. It is like a miracle. The skin looks much more alive, much more few with nutrients. No more meat makes wonders as in meat there are lots of toxins . They make you look older. The nutrients in vegetables and fruits make you look good and younger. In meat there are proteins but the sickness in animal food is so important that it is not worth taking . And there are not so much nutrients in meat compared to vegetables and fruits. We were made to eat fruits and vegetables . Your skin will m=look much better without meat. Replace the meat part of your plate with more vegetables. You will end up eating the same amount ant feeding your body much better. How to have better skin naturally? More vegetables and fruits will do wonders for your skin How to have better skin naturally? Juicing Juicing is very powerful it is an incredible way to rejuvenate your skin . Juicing is the most powerful way known to men to refill your body with an incredible amount of nutrients . The fiver is gone in juicing it means that you will digest the nutrients in thirty minute sin your blood . Juicing helps you do the two things that are really important for health. Elimination and high nutrient content . Vegetables are better than fruits. Vegetable juice remineralize your body as fruit juice will eliminate. While your juice rebuild your body cells it will also create a natural crisis in your body of cleansing . Not only your colon will clean up but your lymph system . This is an excellent way to do the two powerful things to get and feel better. Cleaning up your colon and feeding your cells an immense amount of nutrients. How to have better skin naturally? Juicing could be the best way with fasting to have an amazing skin and rebuild nice skin ; How to have better skin naturally? Plants Some powerful natural supplements I have seen that help your skin is castor oil is number one for me . Even before coconut oil . Castor oil pulls things from the body . If you have dry eyes or if you spend long hours in front of the computer. Castor oil can help your eye health . Castor oil is amazing for wrinkles . How to have better skin naturally? Castor oil Another supplement for your skin is coconut oil . I have seen a documentary about a 80 year old woman that looked 40 . They asked her what did she do differently . She said one thing was to out coconut oil on her skin and face everyday . This is an amazing way to also pull toxins from your face and feed your skin . How to have better skin naturally? Coconut oil is an excellent way to have your skin look better fast. Another method and this post will not be extensive. Bentonite clay is incredible as it is filled with minerals. Minerals are found in 1 sea water 2 fruits and vegetables 3 clay . Clay is one of the fastest way to remineralize your body . We need 90 nutrients everyday to be in good health . Two third of them are minerals. It is important to fill your body with minerals the which your cells crave for good health . A clay mask regularly is excellent to have better, younger looking skin .
How to have better skin naturally? content media
0
0
15
Earthlastday
Jun 06, 2022
In Bible bookstore
How did the bible come about? Who compiled the bible? Which version of the bible is the valid version? The king james version of the bible the documentary . Lucian was used by God . It is seen that the king james version is the most accurate version of the bible . It is called the textus receptus . Most other versions are the Wescott and Hort versions that have changes a few verses . God promised to preserve the king james version the original version of the bible . Let us find out which bible is the original? To invest in a bible visit our bookstore here
History of the King James version of the bible  content media
1
3
7
Earthlastday
Jun 06, 2022
In Bible bookstore
It is a good thing to share and help one another to know how to grow business . As the end times are coming we need to be prepared to go to the remote place of the earth . Ellen g White tells us that we need to leave the cities to live in the country . And we will need to knwo how to survive . Here is a good freelance facebbok group in the which you can share your ideas and dreams . The digital nomad lifestyle how to atain it? What are your tips and counsels?
Amazing freelance business facebook group content media
0
0
2
Earthlastday
Jun 04, 2022
In Righteousness by faith
March 11, 1889 1 - “The Sabbath Morning Sermon” Matthew 6:33—“Seek ye first ... his righteousness,” is the subject today. We notice first whose righteousness we are to seek. It is God’s. We must seek and find it or we will not be saved. Nothing else will avail. We must know, however, where to seek for it and how, because we often seek for it in the wrong place; for instance, as many do, in the law of God, and through keeping it. We will never find it there. That is not the place to seek for it. This is not saying that the righteousness of God is not there. The commandments are the righteousness of God, but we will never find it there. In Romans 2:17-18, we see that the law is clearly pointed out, through which, if we are instructed, we are called of God. Then they, being the will of God, it would be impossible for the Lord himself to be better than the ten commandments require us to be. The Lord’s will must be the expression of what he is himself; hence it is impossible he should be better than his law. To keep his commandments, then, means that we shall be as good as God is, so we read in 1 John 3:7: “He that doeth righteousness, is righteous even as he is righteous.” Now see Psalm 119:138, Deuteronomy 6:25, Isaiah 59:7—the people who do the law of God are righteous, even as God is righteous, then to keep them means that man must be like God in character. Then the righteousness of God is in his law, but it is not revealed to men by the law. Romans 1:16-17, the righteousness of God is revealed in the gospel to men, and not in the law. It is in the law, but it is not revealed there to us because we are sinners, and sin has so darkened our mind that we can not see it there, and therefore our vision has to be enlightened by some other means, which is the gospel, where we must seek for it, Romans 3:21. The righteousness of God is made known without the law. How? By faith in Jesus Christ, through the gospel, and not by the law. Now read again Romans 1:16-17, and this will be clear. To show this further, Romans 10:4. Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth. Does not this say the same as the others? We have lost often the real point in this text to use it against those who claim the commandments are abolished, who claim Christ ended the law, and we claiming it means “the purpose of” the law, but the point in this text is that Christ is the purpose of the law “for righteousness” to us, as we can not get it by the law, Romans 8:3. The law was ordained to life, righteousness, holiness, justification, but because of sin it cannot be this to us, so what it cannot do Christ does for us. Then, if we seek it in the wrong place we lose the righteousness of Christ. Now, righteousness must come from the same source as does life; they are inseparable. Romans 8:3. Moses uses the terms here interchangeably, so also Galatians 3:21 showing that righteousness must come to us from the same source as life, and that is Christ. Romans 6:23: this we have always preached, but he said before this the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life, and so we have always claimed eternal life to be a gift, but we have not claimed the same for righteousness as being a gift through Jesus Christ. Why was it necessary that something was given to have life? Because the wages of sin was death. If a law could give life, it would be by the law. If the law was a secondary form and God could have made another, and better, it would not suffice because if men could not keep an inferior law they could not keep a superior, consequently no law could give the life. Therefore Christ came to be the purpose of the law to everyone that believeth. Now we want to see what righteousness there is in the law for us, and we will become convinced it is our own, which is the very best we can ever get out of the law. If I take the highest and most comprehensive view of the law I can, and live up to it, is that a satisfying of the law? No, because it is not a high enough view of it, because the mind is all darkened by sin, and man’s comprehension is not broad enough to grasp the height and breadth of it, and so does not meet the requirements of the law. It is our own righteousness then, and not God’s we see in the law and we see ourselves (the extent of our vision) and not the face of God. Often we think we do right and afterwards see it was not so. If it was God’s righteousness at that time, God would be imperfect. It is only in Christ that we can ever see the righteousness of God. But God is the gospel and the gospel is Christ, and so by the law can no man be accounted righteous. We must then have something more than the law to enable us to understand God’s righteousness and to comprehend the law. That something “is Christ Jesus in whom is the fullness of the Godhead bodily.” I read now Romans 10:13; here we have a people seeking earnestly for righteousness. Where? Their own. Did they find it? No. Romans 9:31-32, being ignorant of Christ’s righteousness. They would not believe Christ or Paul, but sought it by the works of the law. Now read verse 30; the Gentiles found it having faith, and not being satisfied with their own righteousness, as did the Pharisees who trusted in themselves that they were righteous. This, too, is where the law will bring us if we try to obtain righteousness through it, but when having faith in Christ, a man sees his sins and longs for the righteousness of God, knowing that it is the goodness, purity and righteousness of Christ that makes him so, he will become righteous. KCMS 1.1 Philippians 3:4-9: here was a Pharisee who lived up to the broadest view of the law of God he could obtain and was blameless, yet he gave it all up for Christ. Galatians 2:2; if “righteousness come by the law then Christ is dead in vain,” our own righteousness is all then we can get out of the law, and that the righteousness of God can come only by Jesus Christ. What is our own righteousness? Isaiah 64:5. Our righteousness is as filthy rags. We have all sinned and come short of the glory of God. What is sin? When Israel came out of Egypt, they knew not God, remembering only that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had a God, but knew nothing more. To make them understand their condition and what sin was he took one of their own words and applied it to his purpose. He took a word meaning “missed its mark” and used it to express sin. Now we have all sinned and come short—that is what Paul means—we have “missed the mark.” Then the more righteousness of the law a man has the worse he is off—the more ragged is he. Now turn to Zechariah 3:1-8. Mrs. White declares this chapter to be a prophecy of this present time. Here we have Joshua standing clothed in his own righteousness and Christ takes it off and clothes him with the righteousness of God. Now Joshua had been doing the best he could, but would he have been saved? No. How often we hear people say “I do the best I can,” and believe they will be saved. Joshua was reclothed and was to stand with the angels. If then our righteousness is all taken away and Christ clothes us with God’s righteousness, then to walk in his law, we will stand with the angels. So then read Isaiah 54:17, first part. Christ, in all his references in the New Testament, repeats only what God had already spoken. Now Isaiah 61:10, that is the song we are to sing, therefore righteousness is the gift of God as surely as is life, and if we try to get it in any other way we shall fail. In Romans 5:12-18, we read that as sin came by one, the righteousness of one brought the free gift of life upon men. So also Romans 3:21-26, it was to declare God’s righteousness that Christ came. Now taking Romans 5:13-17 we find here a free gift and notice particularly verse 17. Righteousness is the gift of life to everyone who believeth, and Jesus Christ will ever be the purpose of the law to everyone who believeth. It is Christ’s obedience that avails and not ours that brings righteousness to us. Well then let us stop trying to do the will of God in our own strength. Stop it all. Put it away from you for ever. Let Christ’s obedience do it all for you and gain the strength to pull the bow so that you can hit the mark. Why did the Saviour came as an infant instead of a man? To die on the cross would have met the penalty. Because he lived a child and met all the temptations a child meets and never sinned—so that any child can stand in his place and resist in his strength; and he lived also as a youth, a man full grown, weaving for us a robe of righteousness to cover us (not to cover our filthy garments as that would be a mixture), takes the filthy garment away and puts his own in their place, so that all may have it if they will. Now if the righteousness is the gift of God, and comes by the gospel, then what is the use of the law? There are several, but they may be used wrongfully. The law entered that the offense might abound, Romans 3:19—the law speaks to sinners that all may become guilty before God to show people their guilt. Now verse 20, the law is to reveal sin to us-unrighteousness, not righteousness—Christ reveals the latter, the law the former. The law of God cannot allow a single sin in any degree whatever. If it did and condoned even a single thought that was not perfect it would sink a soul into perdition. The law is perfect. If it accepts imperfection the Lord must accept it and admit that he is imperfect, because the law is the representation of his character. In the fact that the law demands perfection lies the hope of all mankind, because if it could overlook a sin to a single degree, no one could ever be free from sin, as the law would never make that sin known and it could never be forgiven, by which alone man can be saved. The day is coming when the law will have revealed the last sin and we will stand perfect before him and be saved with an eternal salvation. The perfection of the law of God is that it will show us all our sins, and then a perfect Saviour stands ready to take them all away. When God makes known all our sins it is not to condemn us, but to save us, so it is a token of his love for us, therefore, whenever a sin is made known to you, it is a token of God’s love for you because the Saviour stands ready to take it away. That is why God has given us a Saviour and the gospel. He wants us all to believe in him, come to him and be saved. Read Matthew 5:6. Are there not many here who hunger and thirst for righteousness? Do you want to be filled? Look not then at the law, but the cross of Christ. Read Ephesians 3:14-19: rooted and grounded in faith through his love in our heart. Colossians 2:9-10, for we will be complete in Christ. There is a completeness, joy, peace, goodness, righteousness forever.
AT Jones March 11, 18891 - “The Sabbath Morning Sermon” content media
1
0
17
Earthlastday
Jun 04, 2022
In Natural health
Juicing is so powerful because the food we eat today does not have enough nutrients to really keep us healthy . They say one tomato in 1920 is equivalent to 20 tomatoes today in nutrient content . How then can we be healthy? But putting this nutrition in liquid form . Then the body can digest the juice in 20 minutes . The body really needs 2 things to be healthy 1 elimination 2 absorbtion By juicing we eliminate and we clean up the colon for better aosorbtion . This is an amazing tip
Why is juicing so powerful?  content media
0
0
6
Earthlastday
Jun 04, 2022
In Natural health
I have heard that one of the benefits of intermitent fasting is that people constantly digest food and thus they become sick from overuse . Letting the body rest periods of time is extremely beneficial for the body . In fact this helps the body repair and rest a while . Of course it would take longer fest to benefit a great problem But intermitent fasting is like prevention and helps the body to clean up the bad cells and give a very needed rest to the digestive system .
Intermitent fasting benefits content media
0
0
3
Earthlastday
Jun 04, 2022
In Creation vs evolution
I was wondering if anyone knew how and when did natural selection evolve? Who did chose the rate of evolution of natural selection? If natural selection is the evolution agent then who makes it evolve?
How did natural selection evolve?  content media
0
3
9
Earthlastday
Jun 04, 2022
In Creation vs evolution
I was wondering if there is a way for evolution to think? We are told that things evolve. But how can something become something else unless it was planned? Can anything become anything unless it is planned in advance. Can randomness create something organised for no reason?
Is there a way for  evolution can think?  content media
0
3
8
Earthlastday
Jun 03, 2022
In BIble prophecy
The last five verses of daniel chapter eleven are very important . These are some of the prophecies in the bible that still needs to be fulfilled. Daniel chapter eleven the last five verses, relate to the mark of the beast and the time of the end . The king of the north is that which is north of Israel Babylon or the papacy. Prophet Daniel timeline The king of the sounth is relating to a country south of Israel Egypt which is Atheism. 5 Last verses of Daniel eleven explained 1 Prophet Daniel timeline DA 11 40 2 Prophet Daniel timeline DA 11 41,42 3 Prophet Daniel timeline DA 11 43 4 Prophet Daniel timeline DA 11 44 5 Prophet Daniel timeline DA 11 45 1 Prophet Daniel timeline DA 11 40 DA 11 40 And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over. Daniel chapter eleven verse forty says that the king of the north Babylon, which is today the papacy shall enter into Egypt or a country that signifies Egypt at the end times . France passed the torch of atheism to Russia . When did the papacy attack Russia? Was the prophet Daniel a enuch there is no record of Daniel bring married . When john paul 2 met Reagan in Alaska they planned a strategy to bring down the Russian federation . And when they did strike those poor people . Many countried were entered Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia among others . These countries are now independent . This was the stroke of the papacy of the king of the north against Egypt the atheistic power of Russia . The papacy did pass over and overflow acording to prophet daniel timeline 2 Prophet Daniel timeline DA 11 41,42 DA 11 41 He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon. 42 He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape. Where does the Bible says the country south of Israel which is Egypt . We know Egypt signifies atheism as in RE 11 it says Sodom and Egypt where the Lord was crucified . Ellen g White says this signifies France . France passed to Russia . This king of the south Babyo which we know to be the papacy spiritually would enter the glorious land . Which is the glorious land ? Ellen g White says the United states are a fevoured people of God . God gave the most light to any nation to the people of the United states . The united states are a favoured people, the glorious land . The papacy in daniel chapter eleven enters also the United states . Some escape out of the hand of the papacy EDOM MOAB AMMON Who were these people? They wee cousins of Israel they were descendents of Abrham and Lot childrens . Lot two daughters had sex with him, and the childrens became Ammon and Moab ? Spiritually these are christians cousins of the true church the seventh day adventist church , we can refer here to the sunday protestant churches who are cousins of the seventh day adventist church . Prophet Daniel timeline says that these escape from the papacy's hand. It later says that Egypt which here refers to the whole world being in the condition of Egypt . Sister White says Shell we retrace our steps back to Egypt Egypt is the world Was the prophet Daniel a enuch many old testament people had many wives, interesting that daniel is not mentioned to having had a wife . 3 Prophet Daniel timeline DA 11 43 DA 11 43 But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps. daniel chapter eleven The papacy daniel chapter eleven tells us would receive the treasures of the earth of Lybians and Ethiopians . Lybia is a poor country representing all poor countries. Teh papacy will receive the riches of Ethiopia representing all rich countries .Prophet daniel timeline we see that the last vers sof daniel teach about the papacy enforcing its rule then the fall of the papacy . Same as revelation chapter thirteen . 4 Prophet Daniel timeline DA 11 44 DA 11 44 But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many Who are the kings of the east ? God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit . The papacy will hear news from God that will trouble him in his quest to rule the world again as in the middle ages . Then the papacy will put all his power into destroying the world and utilising the civil power. daniel chapter eleven talked about the time when the mark of the beast is enforced and the working of the papacy against first atheism, then the nations of the world . Prophet daniel timeline gives the very last events before the coming of Jesus in daniel chapter eleven verse forty to forty five Was the prophet daniel a eunuch as a leader in a kingdom it was rare to not have a wife, yet it is not said that daniel had a wife . 5 Prophet Daniel timeline DA 11 45 DA 11 45 And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him. Which glorious land seats between two seas . Glorious lands are either israel of the United states . Israel does not stand between two seas. The United states does . Daniel chapter eleven says that the papacy shall put its tabernacle or house in the United states . That is quite shocking prophet daniel timeline revelation . United states will become enamoured with the papacy and its teachings . A Nations that used to burn catholic bible at its inception . A mountain is a church . The true land where the truth shone is the United states . But daniel chapter eleven tells us that the papacy will come to its end and nobody will help it . Surely the nations after that would have realised that they have been fooled and deceived . The planting of the tabernacle is the sunday law time . When all true believers shall receive persecution. Then the final events shall be rapid ones, then the papacy will fall and Jesus will return . What a glorious end to this amazing daniel chapter eleven . The return of Jesus prophet daniel timeline as revelation 14 tells us that Jesus returns after all people have heard the three angels message and made a descision . Jesus did not die in vain for you . Jesus loves you and his blood was shed for you . Yet there is still a test to pass . The three angels message of the teachings of babyon Which will you chose ? Jesus of human tzachings ? If you prefer to receive Jesus teachings repeat after me Father God forgive my sins help me to understand your end time truth help me to walk with you in your righteousness and take me to heaven in the name of Jesus amen
5 Last verses of Daniel eleven explained content media
0
1
10
Earthlastday
Jun 03, 2022
In Bible study
5 Reasons why most christians will not go to heaven Who will go to heaven according to bible ? One reason why many people will not go to heaven is that they think that what is done in society is approved by God . Warning Many things done in our society even by leaders are abominations for God . Do not follow this world but follow the bible . There is a good reason why God gave us the bible , unless God had given us the bible it would have meant that just following others would be fine . But it it just because our society is evil from the top to the bottom that God gave us the bible to know what i right and wrong . Lk 16 15 And He said unto them, “Ye are they who justify yourselves before men, but God knoweth your hearts. For that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God. Who will go to heaven in judgment day? Let us fund out give reasons why most christians will not go to heaven 1 Thinking that the name christian is enough If you think that the name christian is enough you are deceived . Truth does not come from human beings , truth comes from God . Out example is Jesus and the bible . Your name christian does not mean anything . The bible says that Satan appears as an angel of light and his ministers as ministers of God . They look christian they seem to be christian pastors, but they are really evil angels . But for our society the clothing makes the person . Policemen clothing makes someone a policemen and doctor's clothing makes someone a doctor? No Who will go to heaven bible verse . We see our world believing the clothing rather than the character .In out world wicked people can claim and cloth themselves as good people and most people will believe it . The name christian is not enough it is the first step . But unless you become like Jesus and cleanse yourself from Satanic behaviours like pride, apathy, unloving uncaring spirit, selfishness . Then your fruits shows that you belong to Satan . Your name christian will not grant you an entrance in heaven it is who you are your character ? The bible says Who will go to heaven bible verse EPH 5 27 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. 2 Being as wicked proud and sefish as the world No wonder why Jesus says to the foolish virgins . I do not know you . The foolish virgins tell Jesus We have preached, we have done many wonderful things . Jesus answers i do not know you . Why does Jesus say i do not know you ? Because what count is to be like Jesus humble, kind, honest, sincere, patient, loving, fervent, The traits of your character show who your master is . A proud and unloving preacher is a servant of Satan . A loving pagan or atheist can be the servant of God MT 25 11 “Afterward the other virgins came also, saying, ‘Lord, Lord, open to us!’ 12 But he answered and said, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, I do not know you.’ MT 7 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Who will go to heaven according to the bible ? It is those who have been sanctified and have become like Jesus . No wicked , proud, violent, self important, uncaring, hating person will enter heaven . Many people claim to be christian but when they open their mouth, we know that they are wicked and they do not belong to God . We see that often in churches today and the state of things in the church and outside the church has almost no difference . People often but not always , in the church are as self seeking as wordly people are . 3 Thinking that your works will save you Many christians think that their works will save them . Who will go to heaven according to the bible . But the bible says we are not saved by works, we are not saved by doing but by being . Not being ourselves, but by faith Jesus gives us his righteousness . As all humans are wicked and bad there is no good things in us . You can look at yourself and see there is no good thing . Who will go to heaven in judgment day . Many people think they are good, it is because they do not compare themselves to the truth to the bible . If you see all pigs being dirty around you , you may think that this is the way to be . Most people around you are dirty pigs . If you compare yourself to them you will not enter heaven Who will go to heaven bible verse IS 33 15 He that walketh righteously, and speaketh uprightly; he that despiseth the gain of oppressions, that shaketh his hands from holding of bribes, that stoppeth his ears from hearing of blood, and shutteth his eyes from seeing evil; GA 3 11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. 4 Not spenting daily time with Jesus If you do not spend time everyday with God , then you do not love Jesus . Your belief in the truth is just a profession a front . It is not real . If it like a woman who says I love you and never spends time with you . The bible says MT 4 4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. In fact your faith is vain as you develop friendhip and communion wit God when you send time with Him . God says that all those who seek Him will be found of God . JE 29 3 And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart. As you spend time with the loving Jesus , then He will come near to you ? You will feel the loving presence of Jesus and the comfort of the Holy Spirit . Who will go to heaven bible verse . Only those who are like Jesus . As you read the bible everyday you feed your mind with spiritual truth and you can reject the lying attacks of the day which are thrown at you . In fact if you think about bible verses during your day then you can be stronger against the attacks of Satan . 5 Not helping people to go to heaven and be healed If you do not spend regular time by love, bu the power of God in you . Through the righteousness by faith, then you cannot go to heaven if you do not help others . Who will go to heaven on judgment day . Those who are like Jesus , those who have spent time with God, those who have helped others, those who are like Jesus , those who not only have the name christian but whose behaviour shows they are christians . The bible says that God mas given us a work, it is to tell all people we can about the truth and how to escape the coming calamities that are coming on earth . In heaven most of our time will be spent helping others and loving others . As no selfish, proud person will be in heaven . Who will go to heaven according to the bible . If you do not care about others why do you think you will go to heaven ? If you are not used to bless and love others, you will not suddenly be cleansed and become loving and caring . Sanctification is a lifelong work . HE 12 14 Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord:
5 Reasons why most christians will not go to heaven content media
1
4
22
Earthlastday
Jun 03, 2022
In Bible study
5 Reasons why the seventh day adventist church is lukewarm The seventh day Adventist church is the true church . It is clear from the Bible and fro the teaching of Jesus . But the church Jesus says is lukewarm Beliefs of the seventh day Adventist church The beliefs are al biblical Why is the 7th day adventist church lukewarm? What happened to this pure church ? Read on five reason why the 7th day adventist church is lukewarm 5 Reasons why the seventh day adventist church is lukewarm 1 7tth day adventist church lukewarm 1888 Rejected There was a message given in 1888 by two pastors than changed the seventh day adventist church it was the revelation of the righteousness of Jesus by two pastors AT Jones Waggoner Since then when i enter a 7th day adventist church i feel if the church is legalist or not . There are so many legalist adventists and the reason is that the message of 1888 that God gave to lignten the earth with his glory was rejected . And sadly even today the 7th day adventist church is not preaching this message much . One of the greatest beliefs of the seventh day adventist church is the righteousness by faith message . Why are 7th day adventist not studying or reading this most precious message? It is incredible as this message is the solution of the legalist malady we see everywhere in the world and the 7th day adventist church Seek a 7th day adventist church near me , as not all of them are legalist . The 7th day adventist message is the truth , yet some members are legalists , thus the church is lukewarm . 2 7ttth day adventist church lukewarm Sleepy preachers How many times i enter a 7th day adventist church and i hear a sermon that i have heard so many times . Over and over again we hear the woman at the well, the prodigal son, the Nicodemus story . Aren't there no more chapters in the Bible . How big is the Bible and how little we preach the Bible is an offense to God . The beliefs of the seventh day adventist church is the only true church . But most of us know about five percent of the Bible . The 7th day adventist church near me is the truc church . Yet Jesus gives rebukes, Jesus says it is in a laodicean state, and is lukewarm What are the beliefs of the 7th day adventist church the righteousness by faith message is the message of the Seventh day adventist church most non Adventists have never heard about . And sadly because Adventist themselves di not study this message and ar ein a terrible lukewarm condition 3 7tth day adventist church lukewarm As the world What is the world? I heard a very good sermon today at the 7th day adventist church near me . It was a wake up message . Yet the brother and most christians have no clue what sin is . He said sin is going to movies and listening to wordly music . It is not the best to do . But sin is much more than that and if christians do not know what sin is how can they avoid it? Doing as the world as for most christians they avoid killing and drumgs, alchool, porn and that's about it . The pharisees and Satan never used drugs, alchool, or went to movies yet they are very wicked . Sin is not being like Jesus Pride, selfishness, apathy, deception, hate, judging others, seeking the first place, revenge, There are two list of sins in the Bible we should memorize in Romans 1 and 2 Timothy 3 2 TI 3 But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2 People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4 treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people. Romans 1 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. The beliefs of the seventh day adventist church , it is the bride of revelation 12 The true church, Jesus says all other churches are Babylon . Yet the 7th day adventist church near me can do as the world . As they do not know what sin is . And almost nobody on earth knows what sin is . Sin is Not loving God Not loving others Can you love others and do those things mentionned above? No what are the beliefs of the 7th day adventist church The most important belief instead of repeating the sabbath so much and having churches filled with legalists, would be to study the righteousness by faith message 4 7th day adventist church lukewarm No spiritual life I see that many members of the 7th day adventist church near me do not have a spiritual life. When we hear the sermons, or when i talk to them . And i am not talking about the 7th day adventist church only As this is going on all over the world. But the difference is that the 7th day adventist church should be different and be separate and show spiritual life When we talk to someone who is supposed to be a christian we should hear a message . When i talk to many christians and 7th day adventists they have no message to give . It means 1 They do not study their Bibles 2 They do not pray As when we spend time with Jesus He gives us a message and He talks to us in his Word and prayer The beliefs of the seventh day adventist church it says the truch church went in the wilderness 1260 years the papal persecution time , then the true church comes out Perfect belief of your 7th day adventist church near me So what are the beliefs of the 7th day adventist church Jesus says that it comes out after the 1260 years of papal persecution than ended in 1798 5 7tth day adventist church lukewarm No evangelism I am in a city where there are One million inhabitants . There are about ten thousand 7th day adventists . How long doe sit take to reach a city of one million with twenty thousand? If every members talks or reaches three persons a day it would take about one month for everyone in the ciry to know who the 7th day adventists are . Incredible to see that many people i have talked to say Who? The seventh day what? In United stated there are three hundred million people There are one million 7th day adventists It means that if every member talks to ten persons a day , that is ten million people reached in a day . That is one hundred million people reached in ten days . Why are there still so many people in the united stated who have never heard of the seventh day Adventist church ? What is the church doing ? What are the members doing ? Why are they not telling others about the truth ? Did you know it can take only one minute to say Do you know Ellen G White ? She is the true prophet, there are free apps with all her books in google The beliefs of the seventh day adventist church are all biblical, the 7th day adventist church near me believes the truth , but the members are not resembling always Jesus it is in a lukewamr condition What are the beliefs of the 7th day adventist church it is the church of revelation 12 The true church Why not come to Jesus and study the healing message for the laodiceans the righteousness by faith message? This message is life or death . This righteousness by faith message is the only solution for a laodicean condition Ellen g White says, it is the message upon which the destiny of the whole church depends If you have not accepted Jesus before Jesus loves you Would it be a crazy idea for you to accept Jesus in your heart now ? Repeat after me Father God forgive my sins, help me ti have the righteousness of Jesus and take me to heaven please in the name of Jesus amen
5 Reasons why the seventh day adventist church is lukewarm content media
1
3
9
Earthlastday
Jun 03, 2022
In Bible study
I know this sounds crazy but i have talked to pastors and many christians aboutfornication in the bible , and nobody has been able to give me sound Bible verses to prove otherwise Sex out of mariage is not a sin . The word fornication in the bible never means sex out of mariage . If nobody can covet before mariage, then all christians are guilty as they all coveted before getting maried . 5 Reasons why fornication sin it is not 1 Is premarital sex a sin? 1 Poligamy in old testament Why sex out mariage is not a si 1 1 Fornication in the Bible Covet 2 Fornication in the Bible Pornea 3 Fornication in the Bible Old and new testament 4 Fornication in the Bible Bible verses 5 Fornication in the Bible Before and after the cross of Jesus 1 Fornication in the Bible Covet It says in matthiew chapter five That whosoever looks on a woman to lust after her has already commited fornication in his heart If we take this verse in context we see that Jesus is talking about maried people as Jesus says . You have heard you shall not commit adultery . Thus this does not refer to single people . Fornication in the bible is not a sin , as have you lusted over your husband or wife before getting married? Yes Have you decided in your heart before getting married, yes i want him, yes i want her? Yes Thus if this interpretation was true it would mean that 1 Jesus wilfully makes every christian to sin 2 That all christians that ever maried are guilty of coveting someone before getting married Fornication sin against the body as we shall see later fornication never means sex out of mariage . Fornication sin, no it is not as reading all this post you should understand. The word covet can be good or bad, coveting someone's goods wife animals, cars is a terrible sin . But the Bible says we can covet good things like 1 To be a bishop 2 Angels covet to look into the things of the cross Can we covet something that does not belong to someone ? No An apple tree in a garden you jump in a take an apple Did you covet ? Yes The same apple tree in the mountain does not belong to anybody you take an apple Did you covet ? No Why ? Because the apple tree does not belong to anyone A person can only covet someone sexually when they belong to someone . As what is evil about adultery is not the sexual act as the sexual act was created by God . What is evil is coveting or wanting something or someone that already belongs to someone else . 2 Fornication in the Bible Pornea Pornea is the greek word for fornication in the bible Pornea never means sex out of mariage . The bible was written in english in 1611 Which meaning did the writers use then for fornication? Did they use the 1611 meaning or did they use the 2021 meaning? They used the 1611 meaning . PORNEA in greek means 1 spiritual adultery 2 Idolatry 3 All sexual sins found in leveticus chapter 15 TO 18 We see in these chapters, all the sexual sins are mentioned . It mentions homosexuality, bestiality, incest . A verse says You shall not take a woman with her sister . Interesting If it was a sin to have sex with a random woman why would God put that verse there? Would it not say It is a sin to have sex with a random woman and if you have sex with her sister it is worse . But why does the bible says You shall not have sex with a woman and her sister? Because fornication sin it is not a sin . Fornication is a natural need of humans. There are natural needs and unnatural So steel lie kill these are not natural needs put by God inside us they are contrary to nature To want to eat and have sex are natural needs and desires that God has ut inside us So if you want to refrain those natural needs try all you can and you will always want to have sex until the day you die . 3 Fornication in the Bible Old and new testament Paul says in the new testament It is better to mary than to burn . If it was a sin to have fornication in the bible outside mariage , what would Paul have seid ? Paul would have said Never burn and a christian should always mary What does burning mean.? Burning means Wanting greatly to have sex Having sex often with multiple partners Not been able to refrain to having sex regularly The meaning of fornication in the Bible is always in the context of the sexual sins mentionned in leveticus chapter 15 TO 18 It never mentions fornication sin or fornication as a sin . Was it ok to have incredible sex orgy five minutes before the cross, and five minutes after the cross it becomes very evil ? That is a crazy belief yet many christians believe that . Salomon had seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines . Same with many people of his time . So it was ok for him to have great amount of sex and not for us today ? What kind of belief is that ? Will God judge Solomon and old testament people different that people today? You over there you are old testament person ? You had a lot of sex ? Enter into my joy You over here you are a new testament person ? You have some sex ? You enter into the flames of hell God is not partial God cannot judge people differently . Sin never changes, sin is always the same . fornication in the Bible is not a sin there are many argument for this position . fornication sin against the body because fornication was sex with prostitutes in Corinth where the christians would go to the fornix, a fonix is an arch . In the arch they would ask favours to satan and thus commit fornication . This is the real meaning of fornication . Christians going to the arches of the fornix and having sex with prostitutes to ask favours to satan . This is why fornication is a sin against the body as you it is satanic worship . fornication sin well it cannot be as it is a natural need of every human being . 4 Fornication in the Bible Bible verses Did Paul say tha tit is good for a men not to touch a woman 1 CO 7 ? Yes what is the context ? The context was there was tremendous persecution in corinth . At the end of the chapter paul says I tell you these things because of the present persecution . Why did men had not to touch women ? Because there was incredible persecution and it was not a time for courtship and love . Fornication in the bible is all sexual sins except sex out of mariage . It would contradict paul who later said two chapters after that Have i not the right to lead about a sister as Cephas? In fact Paul in this chapter 1 CO 9 said 1 CO 9 11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things? What does the word carnal mean? T hings pertaining of the body . Paul and we will get a different post entirely on this topic in more detail .The word flesh means sexual things . Paul is saying that he was leading about sisters from different churches in missionary journeys just to have sex with them . And the corinthians were complaining about this . Jude talks about solomon fornication this is homosexuality Flee fornication yes we need to flee adultery homosexuality lesbianism incest In fact we will see in a different post if God gives me the time to write it that it could not be a sin to have multiple wives as Moses had a wife from Midian and a wife from Cush . Yet God used him to wrote You shall not commit adultery Yes fornication in the Bible is not a sin,fornication sin against the body because pornea or fornication was spiritual idolatry with harlots in Corinth arches an arch is a fornix fornication sin not it cannot be as God cannot make a natural desire to be a sin 5 Fornication in the Bible Before and after the cross of Jesus Before the cross men and many good men could take as many wives as they chose . Even the best men in the bible such as Abraham, David , Solomon, Jacob, Essau, Elkanah, Yet in Hebrews eleven it says that Solomon and Samson are not only good men but heroes of faith . Incredible , These men today if they live din a regular church they could be kicked out, yet God says thet are heroes of faith . God winked at it question Can God wink at sin ? No So sex out of mariage was not a sin . It was not the best thing to do byt it was not a sin . But when these men went for pagan women that is when God got angry . Solomon's sin was not having many wives, solomon's sin was to be with pagan devil worshipper women . We proved that fornication in the Bible is defenitly not a sin that fornication sin against the body is when Corinthians went in the fornix the arches to worship satan with prostitutes , that fornication sin is a false belief from christian churches that needs to be removed. If you have seen value in this post and this has given you freedom to more more happily and with more pleasure why not suscribeand like our youtube channel and website ? Jesus loves you are you in Jesus ? Do you want to go to heaven ? Repeat after me Father God forgive my sins help me to love with you and take me to heaven in the name of Jesus amen
5 Reasons why sex out of mariage is not a sin content media
1
2
14
Earthlastday
Jun 03, 2022
In Bible study
Did you know that if you are a legalist you are separated from Christ ? This is what Paul said to Galatians. Some were trying to be saved by the law and Paul said that they are preaching a false gospel, that they were separated from Jesus . Did you know that if you are a legalist you are proud and you think that there are good things in you? These are lies that need to be removed become you become a true christian Find out the 5 ways not to be a legalist The pharisee and the tax collector parable illustrates this point well Was Paul a pharisee , he was by name but Paul was the ultimate example of a non legalist . The parable of the pharisee and the tax collector We see the pharisee thinks he is good, the tax collector knows he is a bad person On which side are you ? The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector Luke 18 9 To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, Jesus told this parable: 10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’ 13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’14 “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.” 1 Accept you are not good The only way that you can cleanse yourself from legalism is to recognize that you are not good and only God is good . Unless you do so there is no hope for you . If you ask the question to one hundred persons on the street Are you a good person How many will say I am a good person ? Almost everybody It shows that legalism is almost everywhere in society . Some countries are more legalist than others. The pharisee and the tax collector show that you can be a christian and be a bad person . The name christian does not mean anything . The bible says there is none good not even one they are all gone astray there is none that seeks God The bible says also that unless we are conected to the root the branch has no spiritual life in it .The bible says that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God . Le us accept the fact that there is not one good person on earth not even one All our good works arelike filthy rags . You can do your best and without God it is still bad as the intentions are wicked , selfish, corrupt. When Jesus was taken all the apostles fled . We are but men , we are dust, we are clay , humans are not God . There has never been a good human being since the creation of the world . Some humans are less evil than others , but they are still evil as inside human beings there is nothing good . Paul said I know that in me that is in my flesh nothing good dwells. When i want to do good, evil is present in me . If Paul the best christian that even lived can say that how much more you and me are evil? Was Paul a pharisee yes but God changed Paul to realize his sinfulness and to receive the righteousness of Jesus . Paul killed christians and in his legalism he thought he was doing a good deed. The parable of the pharisee and the tax collector show that some christians do recognize that they are evil and cna receive the righteousness of Jesus by faith . Unless you ask Jesus for his righteousness every day you will fail . 2 Accept you are a sinner Have you ever sinned ? Then you are not a good person. Some churches teach that your good works eliminate the bad works. No Adam and Eve sinnedont time and they died . Same for you and me for one sin only you and me deserve to die . The wages of sin is death Sin is the transgression of the law. Not human law sin is the transgression of God's law. We need to keep human laws too because God said so . We are sinners and all humans have sinned, interesting to know that Jesus never sinned while on earth . This is why Jesus could pay our price on the cross . The pharisee and the tax collector show that the pharisee beat his breast saying God, i am a god person i do this and that . Interesting to see that legalists think that bu doing thing they receive righteousness . This show their wicked heart as they try to buy God's favour, they try to receive righteousness by doing . So it shows that legalists and pharisees are not good as to be good would be something we are and if we were good we would not need to do things to claim our goodness. Our goodness would be in us already . Just by saying i do this i am a good person proves that legalists are evil . Was Paul a pharisee yes but in Galatians Paul said that That no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident Here we see that men can be seen as good men in the sight of men . But what matters to be accepted of God or accepted of men? James 4 4 Don't you know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Accept you are a sinner 3 Accept that only Jesus is good When the young rich men came to Jesus he said Good men Jesus said None is good but God We see here another legalist who Jesus is trying to make see that he was trying to gain salvation by works . The bible is clear only God is good, when men do good deeds by the power of God then men was only a channel . God did the work . Men is only a channel for good or for evil Revelation 19 says Jesus is True and righteous and in righteousness he does judge and makes war To the pharisee Jesus said Who can convince Me of sin . Yet in the eyes of the world Jesus was evil as pharisees said he has a devil . It show how corrupt and amiss are men's judgment . 4 Accept that only Jesus has righteousness The good news is that Jesus has the solution . Jesus wants you to see that you are not good and you will never be and only in Jesus is a power called righteousness by faith that can help you have His righteousness . It will not mean that you will never sin again but you stand up after a fall and walk again , yet we do not walk in our own power but in God's power and righteousness . Yet it is possible to never sin anymore . The pharisee and the tax collector shows how many people claim to be religious and are evil , selfish, proud, and blind to their own spirtual condition . In different countries we see the same thing , religious and atheists all over the world think they are good . They do not realize that only God has the solution the righteousness by faith that gives power to do and be good . Was Paul a pharisee before his blind encounter yes, we see that God put Paul blind as legalists see themselves good in their own eyes. We see that God sees things totally differently than humans see things . The parable of the pharisee and the tax collector show that human principles and righteousness is worthless to change the heart. Human dogmas are worthless to make someone good. Human edicts are powerless to change their citizens into good, honest, kind human beings 5 Accept that unless you do so you cannot go to heaven This is such a serious topic as many religious people think that by accepting Jesus they will automatically go to heaven . It is not true Jesus said to the foolish virgins I do not know from whence your are depart from Me you that work iniquity Is it the same loving Jesus that took childrens in his arms that is saying to fifty percent of christianity Go away ? Yes The five virgins represent half of all christianity . Many shall come in my name saying we did Prophesied Cast out devils Many wonderful works It is possible that this fifty percent of christianity with today's numbers it is about one billion persons . They helped the poor, they went to church every week, they fed the hungry . Yet Jesus will tell them you do not have the weeding garment ;, those works you thought you did by yourself and to receive glory of men . Jesus said how can you believe you that receive honour one from another and do not seek the glory that comes from God only . Jesus also said Not he that commends himself is accepted but he that the Lord commends. The men came in at the wedding feast having his own righteousness and his own works. He was sure he could go in as he was a christian and never did much evil . But he had his own righteousness and robbed God of his glory and thought himself to be God as all people who are legalist think themselves to be God . Unless you ask the righteousness of Jesus you will have your own, you cannot have borh at the same time . Earthly corrupt works of God's perfect holiness and righteousness . Which will you chose . Chose ye this day which you will have your human defective works or Jesus perfect rightteousness? Repeat after me Father God i see myself as a sinner now i ask you please to forgive me Please put your righteousnesss on me and help me to walk with you until Jesus comes in the name of Jesus amen
5 Ways not to be a legalist content media
1
4
11
Earthlastday
Jun 03, 2022
In Natural health
I am not a dovtor and we have to say that in this wicked world because the rulers of this world do not belong to Jesus . As if they did they would not have people say i am not a doctor . As everyone is responsible for their own health and to prevent diseases . As the Bible says we are the temple of God . Thus we are responsible to take our health into our own hands and seek how the body can heal . Yet i give here five ways i believe on how to heal the coronavirus naturally 5 Ways to prevent and heal coronavirus 1How to heal coronavirus naturally Fasting Fasting is extremely powerful . When we eat the body uses eighty percent of its power to digest food . Can you imagine when the body is resting and not digesting . How much power the body then has to heal diseases. How to heal coronavirus naturally . If i had the coronavirus, the first thing i would do is fast . To prevent coronavirus fasting it the number one thing i would do. It is not easy but it is very powerful. In fact i did not know many diseases that cannot be healed with fasting . To heal coronavirus i would fast because the body will do what is called autophagy . When the body doe snot have anything to eat, it will start to eat the bad cells, the cancer cells, the body will start to cleanse the liver, the body will start to flush the kidneys. How to heal coronavirus naturally . Fasting it the power healer 2 How to heal coronavirus naturally Vitamin c But the faster way on how to heal coronavirus naturally is to take one hundred grams of vitamin c per day . Many people say o vitamin c or garlic will not heal coronavirus . Many people that try natural remedies fail . Why ? Because they take too little a dose . A little dose of vitamin c will never heal coronavirus . Even if you take like fifty grams of vitamin c a day which is a lot it will very likely not heal coronavirus . So can you imagine so many peope take like five hundred miligrams of vitamin c a day and expect that to heal . No five hundred miligrams, or five grams, or twenty grams of vitamin c are not enough . I went to dentist before i had very bad gum infection . The laughed when i said vitamin c will heal But when that happens .I put one hundred grams of vitamin c in one liiter of juice or water and i trink some every thirty minutes. Usually the infection is gone after three days . How to prevent coronavirus ? Vitamin c is very powerful when you take enough and long enough 3 How to heal coronavirus naturally Castor Oil Castor oil will not heal coronavirus, even that is yet to be tested . But castor oil on the chest and drinking castor oil if you have coronavirus helps immensely and cleanses up your chest and lungs . How to prevent coronavirus naturally? Castor oil is one of the most powerful oil on earth . Castor oil is the only oil when put on the skin, enters the bloodstream and starts to cleanse the body . Putting castor oil at night on the kidneys, colon, chest in amazing to give your body a good cleanse . Castor oil is one good ingredient in to prevent coronavirus . I remember my mom had water in the lungs, she was quite sick and the doctors had no idea what to do . I told her mom put some castor oil on your chest and you will soon be much better . Three days later her lungs were perfectly healed . How to heal coronavirus ? Castor oil on the chest is one way to success 4 How to heal coronavirus naturally Neem Oil Neem oil is the most powerful blood cleanser we have on earth . Neem oil is a spermicide, meen oil works better than condoms . Neem oil is so amazing that it can prevent most sexually transmited diseases . Neem oil heals malaria . Neem oil heals diabetes. What an incredible herb . How to heal coronavirus naturally ? Take neem oil and your will cleanse your blood and body from impurities . How to prevent coronavirus ? Take neem oil but not too much as neem oil is so powerful it can make you vomit . How to heal coronavirus? What i do is that i put just a few drops in a small bottle of water or juice and it is ingested much easier this way 5 How to heal coronavirus naturally Win Hoff method Do you know the Win Hoff method, this is incredibly powerful , since i watched Win Hoff videos i use it everyday . It is breathing exercises and cold showers . How to heal coronavirus naturally ? Win Hoff method Did you know that the real doctors called the hygienists used to use cold showers for what is called the incurables ? People who were at the point of death the method is cold and hot showers . It revigorates the body and wakes up the organs . They injected Win Hoff with a deadly bacteria E coli, he wanted to show how powerful his immune system was . And the bacteria did not kill him . They thought that because it was Win Hoff that was specially built . Win Hoff trained his brother in the breathing and cold showers . The scientists also injected his brother with the e coli bacteria and he did not die also . Cold showers wakes up all your organs and body and gives you an amazing immune system L Of course it depends on what you ear eating and your lifestyle . How to prevent coronavirus ? Win Hoff method is free and gives instant results . How to heal coronavirus ? The Win Hoff method the breathing makes you immune system much more powerful If you liked this post why not suscribe and like our Earth last day channel on youtube Did you know that Jesus loves you? Why not accept Him now in your heart ? Repeat after me Father God forgive my sins and take me to heaven in the name of Jesus amen
5 Ways to prevent and heal coronavirus content media
0
0
4
Earthlastday
Jun 03, 2022
In Creation vs evolution
I have done about one thousanf debates with atheists from different countries , including famous research scientists in France and Aron Ra who left the debate after three days . Not being able to answer the questions . These are the five main points that you can use to have the truth to triumph . We do not win debate, goal is to win a soul for Jesus . And tue truth wins social darwinism apush . Only if the eprson is honest shall they accept As an angel could talk to a dishonest person and they shall reject the truth . Evolution theory government definition The reason for this post is when we train the church, the thr truth advances . 1 Social darwinism apush Planning In debates going to details is a waste of time . We have to go to the origin the root of their belief . Do things apear for no reason? No Do things appear from nothing? No Do thing appear out ot nowhere? No Evolution is the believe in magic . Things plants, animals, humans do not appear for no reason . All things need to be planned . This planning issue is the breaking point for evolution . All things need to be planned A car, a shoe, a plane, a phone, a computer . A house has a shape, a color, someone planned the size of the bedroom, the size of the kitchen. They planned their use and function . Then material was found then used to make the house Evolution theory of government definitoon The house, unless it is planned in someone's mind will never be . Nothng that exist can exist unleee it is planned. Sovcial darwinism apush . After that the more the atheist will be brianwashed by the random cult , the longer it will be for him to get it . I have had people who right away say Yes i understand evolution is stupid ad nothing can exist unless it is planned. Some people woill keep on giving exal=mples only to find out that they did believe in magic . Why is earth blue anr not red ? Why is earth round and not square? Why is earth spinning ? Why do humans have two eyes and not four eyes ? Can natural selection and mitation chose these things ? No Why Natural selection does not have No brain No thought No intelligence No planning But unless something is planned it cannot exist . As believing otherwise is believing in magic . Believing otherwise is like saying a rock and a tree in the forest can become a castle evolution theory of government definition different than God's definition For no reason Out of nowhere From nothing Natural seletion and mutation the two gods that atheists worship cannot make or create anything . They ar eonly a program that God created to preserve species Unless God had created natural selection forst cold or change of food we would all die . This God given program preserve sspecies but it does not create anything . Why? Because it has no brain, no intelligence, no planning . It is a blind mechanism that God told it to preserve animals , humans when cold comes after a long summer . As natural selection or the god of evolution cannot plan, then it cannot create anything . And when evolutionist say i believe that it does. Then they truly believe in Hudini's magic . What is more scientific evolution theory or Hudini's magic. Hudini's magic as with Hudini we know that the rabbit is real 2 Sociel darwinism apush Opnions One main reason why atheists are so is because they think I believe somehting thus it is true . Most people today think that because they believe something it becomes true . It is like saying tribe sin Africa believe they eat your brain and receive power . Truth does not depend on our feelings . Did you create truth ? No Did truth exist before you were born ? Yes Will truth remain the same after you die ? Yes By you living did you change truth ? No Who create dtruth ? God Who only can decide what truth is ? God What is men's job ? To seek the truh How will God judge humans ? All honest people will accept truth All dishonest people will reject truth social darwinism apush can be easily exposed with seeing thatt they believe in their own beliefs and not the truth . Someone and most people's minds are dishonest thus their feelings is not the trurh evolution theory government definition is science But the word science was stollen from evolutionists 160 years ago . Evolution theory of government definitoon They mix scientific facts with a religion called evolution . And many people see some scientific facts and are deceived byt the religion called evolution 3 Social darwinism apush Honesty It all come sdown to honesty . So many atheists are trying to judge God Can you immagine such a crazy thing ? Humans judging God and God's creation . God sends tue truth to all people. TH eHoly Spirit talks to the hearts everyday . God sends messengers to preach the truth . All who reject the truth are dishonest Al who accept the truth are honest . In the times nf Noah the onlyb thing God did was send Noah to preach one hundred and twenty years . All the honest in the crowd accepted the truth . The others the majority all wee eigher dishonest or blinded by the media, blinded by the crowds, blinded by the scientists of their day / social darwinism apush is destroyed easily as nothing can appear for no reason , out of nothing from nowhere This is definitly the belief in magic they call it science today evolution theory government definition is science , but today science is science plus a religion called evolution . Evolution theory of government definitoon ; science is what we can Test Measure Analyze Millions of years, transition specie to specie, geological colums, big bang, these are doctrines and beliefs of a church called the random cul or the random church which has a prophet called Darwim and two gods natural selection and mutation . To these two gods atheists give reasoning powers and divine atributes . 4 Social darwinism apush Transitionss Transitions are the only reason why atheists belive in the random religion called evolution . Why do atheists believe in evolution? Because they assume things Never assume anyting unless you know the facts Assuming can destroy your life . Pharisees assumed, Jesus was poor, no house, no money. They assumed and came to conclude This man cannot be the son of God They judged by apparence . Why do atheists believe in evolution They see changed in the species they ASSUME As we see changes, a small cat becomes a bigger cat WE ASSUME Cat becomes an elephant This iw where tey have it wrong , they immagine things and they assume things that are not real. Yes there are change sin the species . Humans change color and adapt to heat, small cats become bigger cats . This is God given adaptation process to preserve us . Because we see transition in the species does not mean that the cat becomes a fish Because we see a skateboard doe snot mean the skateboard becomes a motorcycle Because we see a rock and a tree does not mean they become a house Because we see a piece of metal does not mean it wil become a car Bad social darwinism apush is eposed as false and areligious cult which believes in magic , evolution theory government definition is science, God says it is science falsely so called Evolution theory of government definitoon is taught as truth all ove rthe world. The Bible says it is a delusion of the mind . 5 Social darwinism apush God has no proof Many atheists say there is no proof for God God says I tell yiou things before they come to pass that you may know that I am God What is God(s proof for His existence and the Bible being true. BIBLE PROPHECY Can a man say what aill happen June 10 Year 3000 ? No Can any man say what will happen on june 10 3000 ,? No As God can what does it mean? It means Gof live sin the futur If God lives in the futur what does it mean? It means God is divine If God is divine and He live sin the futur what does it mean? It means the Bible is true and God is the lawgiver and all humans have to recognize Him who give to all food, air, water, money, jobs, friends, talents False social darwinism apush is the belief that things pop up into existence from nowhere, out of nothing nor no reason , the evolution theory government definition is that it is science, but evolution is a religon that was added to science when atheists took over science The evolution theory of government definitoon is nonsense as we know the leaders of this world most of the time do not follow God and we see that they teach contrary to what the Great Leader of the universe has been teaching . Have you seen how evolution is the belief in magic? Have you seen that there is no science in having things pop up for no reason? Why not accept Jesus in you hearr now ? Repeat after me Father God firgive my sins help me to walk with you until the end and take me to heaven in the name of Jesus amen
5 Ways to win debates against evolutionists content media
0
2
17
bottom of page