| Author |
Message |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 528
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 7:22 am: |     |
Ric, I've had similar frustrations, and though my church doesn't teach a dual law, it does teach the 10 Cs are still of value to the church. But when they did a series on them, they principalized them and pulled not just the OT teaching about each law, but also how each law exists in light of the cross. So, do not murder, in light of Christ's teaching steps up to not being angry and the further teachings of the NT. The 4th commandment, he went through the same methodical way as all the other 9, but when it came to talk about what the NT says about the 4th, he said it is not mentioned as a command. He quoted Romans 14, Col 2, etc to say a single day did not exist to keep holy, but the commandment was about "work-life balance". We should take some time for God in our schedules to rest and rejuvenate. It wasn't a "transferrance" in that Sunday is now a day to rest, but that any day could be a day we took time for God, but I found it completely missing the point. I talked to one of our elders and another one's wife. Both of them made basically the same comment that you can't stop preaching the truth just because someone teaches heresy with it. I replied that what I was hearing in my own church seemed to be as unBiblical presumption as the SDA position. Fortunately, 99% of the time, my church focuses on grace ... But when the 10 Cs comes up, my defenses come up as well.
Actually, Ric, you might consider your spiritual gift. It is my understanding that the gift of prophecy is one who wants the purity of God's word proclaimed, therefore someone who has that gift would naturally speak up if the word of God is being perverted. (not in EGW fashion). I had someone tell me I had that gift before they knew about adventism very much. It gave me a sense of purpose about why I've gone through some of this stuff.... and made sense as to why the doctrinal issues get under my skin as they do.
I hope your pastor takes to heart your concerns. |
Doc
Registered user
Username: Doc
Post Number: 122
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 7:49 am: | |
Your arguments are fine Ric.
I have seen it stated in quite a few places, in the middle of teachings that were otherwise reasonably Biblical, that the Ten C. are the moral law and the rest is ceremonial. This viewpoint seems to involve no thought at all. It is so clear that the rest of the law contains both moral and ceremonial precepts, and so do the 10.
Does anyone actually know where this originates, because I would be interested. I believe the Puritans taught something like this, with Sunday as the Sabbath of course, and the Puritan (Reformed) influence on the English speaking world was immense. Interestingly enough, in Britain, this influence has remained strongest in the Celtic countries (Wales, Scotland, N. Ireland) where the Presbiterian church has dominated. In these places, Sabbath (Sunday) keeping still gets a lot of emphasis.
The Puritans were certainly determinative in 19th century America, and the Adventists just took the next logical step of putting the Sabbath back to Saturday, without questioning the "two laws" idea. Interestingly enough, the Mormons, who arose at the same time in the same "atmosphere," also teach that we have to keep the Sabbath (Sunday with them too).
So basically, after that ramble, my question is, am I right that this arose with the Puritans, or does it date back even earlier, if anyone knows?
God bless,
Adrian
|
Susan_2
Registered user
Username: Susan_2
Post Number: 1003
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 11:19 am: | |
Dear 33, I am going to try and learn more about the Orthodox. It will be an interesting study for me, I am sure. For several years I frequented The Society of Friends (Quakers) nearly every week. In this area their meetngs are only Unprogramed, which means we would meet at the meeting place, and in nice weather this was the meadow over at the state park, and for 50 minutes we would sit in complete silence, induldging in private contimplation, meditation, prayer or dozing off. If a person felt a profound calling to make a profound statement, thus breaking the silence than it was urged to do so. After the meeting we would have a simple potluck and then we would have a discussion on the topic of the week. Even the discussion on the topic of the week was a bit different than I'd ever known before. We had a rock and only the person holding the rock was allowed to speek and each person was allowed to speek only once. After this happened we all split and went our seperate ways. It was not really a discussion. It was a learning experience. We were to open our minds to learning from others. Over here the Quakers and the Unitarian Univeralists work very closely together. They do a lot of joint efforts. I really like the group meditation ordeal. The problem is I really missed hearing a sermon, the Christian music, Communion and all the other Christian rituals. I wish he Lutheran andthe Quakers had their meetings at different times so I could attend both. But, each has its thing at the same time on the same day so I have to choose. If any of you out there practice frugality then I would like to refer you to th Quakers. They can teach you how to maxamize your dollars and minnimize your expenses. They even have a book out on how to do a funeral for $200. I immagine with inflation the cost would be more now but I'm sure it would still be way less than anyone else can come up with. Did you know that during WW2 the Quakers, although they do not take part in war or combat, they were in great harm as they took food, medical supplies and mail to the troops of every side in the conflict? They have some very interesting stories of different things people from their group has done. |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 791
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 1:55 pm: | |
I don't know where the "split" in the law came from, either. I wonder, however, if it might have come even earlier than the Puritans, although my understanding is they certainly had the concept down pat! Wasn't it really a split between "cermonial" and "moral" laws that underlay the Catholic heresies of salvation by works? It seems that martin Luther's response to Romans and Galatians was really an answer to the idea of being tied to the law--which meant being tied to performance.
I'm not sure it was all stated in terms of Moral and ceremonial laws, but it seems that this heresy has been with us since shortly after Pentecost--hence the book of Galatians as well as of Romans, Colossians, Ephesians, and Hebrews.
Ric_b, your letter is very good, and I applaud your sending it. Let us know what happens! I SO understand your and Raven's agitation with what you heard. That same subject really agitates Richard and me when we hear it. It really is quite common--it's one of the subtle heresies that has crept into the church. It always feels like a risk when we abandon rules in favor of the Spirit--yet that risk is exactly what produces spiritual freedom and true worship.
I'm praying for you, Ric and Raven, that God will direct you to the church where He wants you to plant and grow, and that He will clearly confirm His leading to you.
Colleen |
Chris
Registered user
Username: Chris
Post Number: 427
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 4:12 pm: | |
Wow Ric! What a great letter. Very cogent arguments backed by scripture throughout. What a great witness to this pastor. You know, I was listening to Bob George (people to people ministry at www.realanswers.com), and he was saying that much of the Curch today has fallen into so much legalism that the apostle Paul wouldn't even recognize it. Sadly, I think that's true. Thank you for your courageous defense of the true Gospel Ric. You did a really good job.
Chris |
Chris
Registered user
Username: Chris
Post Number: 428
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 4:16 pm: | |
A comment on the split in the law. I can't say for sure where this originated, but I am sure it is prior to the puritans. The idea of a moral law as distinct from a ceremonial law is at least as old as John Calvin. This idea is very much alive within the "Reformed" (i.e. Calvinist) tradition today.
Chris |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 27
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 5:01 pm: | |
Well, I think the common Protestant doctrine that we are under the 10 Commandments is probably something left over from Catholicism that most Protestant churches seem to have never abandoned or realized is false. It is very frustrating to me, too!
Jeremy |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 55
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 5:15 pm: | |
The question of when the first split between moral and ceremonial occurred interested me as well. I spent some time searching with google. Far from the most exhaustive research, but it IS handy.
The JewishEncylopedia.com had the most information I could find. (and it was one of the first sites to come up during the search). The first Jewish use of the distinction between laws seems to date to the early 15th Century in Algiers. But this also notes that the idea was "brought over" from Christianity. I found it telling that it wasn't tracked to any earlier Jewish scholars.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=303&letter=C
First Mention of Ceremonial Laws.
The discrimination between "laws based upon reason" and "laws demanding obedience to God's will" was adopted by Saadia ("Emunot we-De'ot," iii. 12; compare Ibn Ezra to Ex. xxi. and "Yesod Moreh," v.), and, with direct reference to the rabbinical passages quoted, by Maimonides ("Moreh Nebukim," iii. 2b; "Shemonah Peraḳim," vi.). Joseph Albo ("Iḳḳarim," iii. 25), if not Simon ben Ẓemaḥ Duran (see Zunz, "G. S." ii. 194), is the first who divides the Biblical laws into ceremonial, juridical, and moral laws. He admits, however, that he adopted this classification from a Christian controversialist
Simon b. Ẓemaḥ Duran (RaShBaẒ):
Rabbinical authority; born Adar, 1361, not in Barcelona, as Zunz ("Zeitschrift," p. 132) and others assert, but on the island of Majorca; a near relation but not a grandson of Levi b. Gershon; died in 1444. He was a pupil of Ephraim Vidal, and of Jonah de Maestre, rabbi in Saragossa or in Calatayud, whose daughter Bongoda he married. He was also a student of philosophy, astronomy, mathematics, and especially of medicine, which he practised for a number of years at Palma. After the persecution of 1391 (see Balearic Isles) he went with his father and sister to Algiers, where, in addition to practising medicine, he continued his studies during the earlier part of his stay.
|
Jerry
Registered user
Username: Jerry
Post Number: 427
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 6:22 pm: | |
Ah, the ol' "moral/ceremonial" thing . . .
I had an interesting experience within the last week where I talked to my 78 year old mother.
You must understand that my father was a Methodist minister (you know, the church from which EGW and family were expelled). Wesley was definitely one of those "the ten are still required but Saturday was changed to Sunday" types.
I mentioned to my mother my understanding of the two covenants, that is we are no longer under the Ten Commandments.
She said, "Of course not. Your father and I have always believed that."
Smart lady. I may not have realized that they believed that, but it might explain why I did not have much trouble understanding it when I took a good look at the Bible about the subject. |
33ad
Registered user
Username: 33ad
Post Number: 39
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 11:20 pm: | |
Hi,
Just a short quote from an Orthodox Catechism on "Saturday". All the other days of the week are discussed too, but of Saturday is said:
"Saturday keeps its original honor as the day on which God rested from the creation of the world. However, since the time Jesus Christ rested in the grave on the seventh day and rose again to life on the first day of the week, Saturday has become a day of thanksgiving for the rest we receive in Christ (Hebrews 4:3-11), as we look forward to the resurrection to come. There is therefore no strict fasting on Saturdays, with the exception of Holy Saturday, the day before Pascha (Easter,). In particular, the Saturday evening Vespers service is devoted to preparing the Faithful for the reception of the Eucharist,(Communion) the Body and Blood of Christ, at the Divine Liturgy on Sunday, the Lordís day."
In Orthodoxy, Wednesdays & Fridays are set aside for abstaining from all animal or dairy products. We become Vegans on those days. Not that I mind, because it has a good effect on my waistline;-)
Loren |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 56
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - 4:39 pm: | |
Well I received a response. A couple "highlights" of the letter--
"I suppose there are some Christians in the world who believe what you believe, although I have never met one. I think you'll have a difficult time finding that church."
"I often enjoy dialog with people over theological issues like this, but I don't think we would have much of a productive conversation until you have the humility to admit that you just might be wrong about something."
"You do not have a teachable spirit. You come across as though you have it all figured out, you're right, and you're not going to stop until you find the church that agrees with you. You seem to have set yourself up as the standard for reasoning and truth."
Sorta makes one want to give up! |
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady
Post Number: 640
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - 6:46 pm: | |
Ric_b,
I am so sorry he has such an attitude. It sounds to me that he does not have a teachable spirit.
Keep praying and God will lead you to the church where He wants you. It sounds like that is not the church. Pray and pray and pray. God loves you and will take you where he wants you. Do not give up. That is what Satan wants you to do. But God is still in control.
He is awesome.
Diana |
Chris
Registered user
Username: Chris
Post Number: 437
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - 10:40 pm: | |
Wow Ric! I'm a bit shocked. My first thought is that this is something of a blessing in disguise. That doesn't sound like a pastor who you would be entirely comfortable submitting to as a spiritual leader. I know it's probably a bit depresing, but I pray that the Lord will lead you where He wants you to be and I KNOW that he has a plan for you that includes your involvement in the Body of Christ.
Chris |
Dennisrainwater
Registered user
Username: Dennisrainwater
Post Number: 101
Registered: 8-2000
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - 10:53 pm: | |
Oh, Ric! I am so sorry!!!!
My jaw just hit the desk as I read that!! Wow!
No, YOU are not coming across as 'unteachable' or as though "you have it all figured out..." You were asking legitimate questions, with very credible Scriptural support for your viewpoint. Arenít we supposed to be able to do that with our pastor??
I think your letter was outstanding, and that your points were gentle and honest. And TRUE.
In my opinion, he is horribly, ARROGANTLY wrong in his response. I am praying for you that God guides you to a church that will dare to teach you the truth. And to a pastor who is willing to be honest enough to admit when he doesn't have all the answers wrapped up!! And that He will use this event to His glory -- and perhaps to correct a pastor who sounds like he has got some pride issues...
That second point (a pastor admitting to not knowing everything) was one of the biggest shocks for us when we left Adventism. God planted us in a Calvary Chapel in Napa, CA to learn, grow and heal for a couple of years... And God bless our pastor there -- we really drilled him on so many questions and issues we were struggling with!! LOL! And he was so gracious and patient with us. But we were both horrified (at first) when we'd pose a question, and he'd respond with something like, "I don't know -- does it MATTER??"
It was so hard for us to learn that there were things that it was simply 'okay' not to KNOW! To admit either that you hadn't studied that out yet -- or that it is a point on which God has not seen fit to give us absolute answers to.
I'm still so totally blown away by what he wrote back to you!!! That second paragraph just floors me!!! Perhaps *HE* lacks the humility to admit that one of his new sheep has a more passionate and active study-life than he has as your "shepherd"... Is that a carnal thought?? I don't know... I'm in shock!!
One more example of why we will ALWAYS be disappointed by everyone but Jesus,
Den <><
|
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 57
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 13, 2004 - 6:35 am: | |
Chris. It is easy to think about it as a blessing in disguise (and I'm sure I will look back and see it that way). But that doesn't diminish the utter frustration, not specifically with this pastor, but with our whole search for a church. A really sad comment on this episode is that we were treated with far more love by leaders in the SDA church that we left despite our detailed reasons, than we were by challenging one teaching in a sermon.
My wife and I were talking about this episode last night (big surprise) and came to at least one interesting conclusion. When we had decided that we would leave the SDA church, our plan had been to wait until we found a new church before we left. More weeks than not we were being spiritual fed at our local church, so there didn't seem to be a rush to resign. Besides we thought it would be nice to say, if asked, where we were going. But then we both became strongly impressed, no doubt the Spirit was at work, that we needed to make the break sooner rather than later. We both agreed last night, that after our recent experiences had we still been in that "in between state" we probably would have stayed in the SDA church much longer, wondering whether it was really worth continuing to look.
It kinda shocked me that someone would think I act like I have it all figured out. I'm still not even sure what all things I don't believe, let alone what I DO believe. Perhaps the only thing I am truly and fully convinced is the God saves us because of Who He is, not because of who we are or who we can become. Otherwise, I just try to make sense of teachings as I relate it to this core belief.
On a brigher note, on the way home from work (before picking up the pastor's email) I had stopped at a book store to pick up a birthday gift for my daughter. I have a disease where I can't leave a bookstore with just ONE book. So I also came home with books from Max Lucado and Brennan Manning. Either one would have been a great antidote for my experience earlier in the evening. I decided on Abba's Child. It was a good choice. |
33ad
Registered user
Username: 33ad
Post Number: 47
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 13, 2004 - 6:48 am: | |
Hi Ric_b,
I left the SDA's and worshipped in my heart at home for nearly 2 years before I found a new Spiritual Home. Don't give up. I had plenty of 'misses' before the Spirit told me 'This is It'
God bless
Loren |
Doc
Registered user
Username: Doc
Post Number: 130
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 13, 2004 - 11:21 am: | |
Ric,
That really was a terrible reply. He was obviously just dismissing you without putting any thought into it at all. I am only leader of a tiny church, but I hope I don't treat people like that, and I hope they don't feel I do.
I think you do need leaders who are able to admit they are wrong, or even that they may be.
Actually, I was always told to have that attitude, even when I was learning just to teach chemistry, which hardly deals with eternal issues. If you don't know something, then just admit it, but be sure you look it up before the next class.
Just hang on to God, let him comfort you, and keep on searching.
I have come across an attitude here a lot, in Hungary, that pastors seem to think that if they admit they are wrong, then people will not respect them. But then they end up making all sorts of pathetic excuses for why they were right even when they were obviously wrong, that people just end up not respecting them anyway.
Tatic of the devil, maybe, pride and fear?
God bless,
Adrian
|
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 802
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 13, 2004 - 12:18 pm: | |
Ric, my first response was outrage when I read those quotes from the pastor. Your letter was kind and direct and non-attacking. I'm so sorry he responded from insecurity--he clearly doesn't feel well-grounded enough in his own beliefs to attempt to defend them with confidence, so instead he attacked. My take on it is that he probably felt startled and threatened by what you wrote because he'd never thought of it like that before. Clearly he has trouble admitting ignorance or failure!
I continue to pray that you and Raven will find the church where God wants you to be. It is out there--and in His time, God will bring you to it. We have found some wonderful pastors who really are grounded in Scripture and are willing to listen to our questions and understandings and return to the Bible for further clarification. I don't know why sometimes it takes longer than others--as Loren mentioned, it took him 2 years. It took us about two years also. But God knows your need for study and fellowship, and He will direct you.
Praying for you,
Colleen |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 58
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 13, 2004 - 2:18 pm: | |
Thanks everyone for your words of encouragement and your prayers.
|
|
