116823 so which of those judgments do you see God writing in our hearts along with the 10c?

oh, i hadnt seen you say anything to that effect til now. but it looks like one needs to continue subdividing based on the statements you provided by the good lady.


otherwise He would? most denominations, as you know, believe Jesus is coming back to set up His kingdom here over the nations. so you mean in that sense, if that were true, then capital punishment for religious offenses would be back in force?

God will never task the Church to enforce capital punishment. He works through civil governments nowadays to enforce law and order. Paul wrote:

Romans
13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
13:2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
13:3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to [execute] wrath upon him that doeth evil.

God commanded Moses and the COI to stone a Sabbath-breaker to death. Why do you think He commanded them to do so?

oh, i hadnt seen you say anything to that effect til now. but it looks like one needs to continue subdividing based on the statements you provided by the good lady.


there were civil governments back in the day also who enforced capitol punishment. its nothing new.

but any way back to the question above

Seems to me like there are two basic subdivisions within the law of Moses: 1) Moral, and 2) Ceremonial. And, yes, as you seem to be suggesting (correct me if I'm wrong), there are further divisions of the moral aspect of the law of Moses (diet, health, social, judicial, punitive, etc). However, based on my reading of the SOP, the moral aspects of the law of Moses are nothing more than an amplification (an innate, inherent part) of the law of God. And, as such, is binding today if not in particular then in principle (i.e. we are no longer obligated to execute capital punishment, women are no longer required to separate themselves during certain times, etc). The ceremonial aspect of the law of Moses, however, ended at the cross.

What have you discovered about it in your personal studies?


True. But the nation of Israel was unique in that she was also God's chosen people to proclaim the truth about sin and salvation and the coming Savior. God did not command or commission any other nation to enforce capital punishment in cases involving violations of certain religious truths (i.e. breaking the Sabbath, practicing idolatry, blaspheming the name of God, etc). Neither has God task the Church with enforcing them. It's not that they're bad "judgments and laws" and so God changed His mind about them. No way. Capital punishment is an integral part of God's covenant and character. "Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord."


All of them. Again, they are nothing more than an amplification of the law of God. They are an innate, inherent part of it. In the same way the 10Cs are an amplification of the two great commandments (love God and man like Jesus does), so too, the "judgments and laws" are an amplification of the 10Cs and , by extension, an amplification of the two great commandments.

PS - The way this relates to the topic of this thread is that I believe the "judgments and laws" that were articulated with the advent of the OC are still binding for us today if not in particular then in principle. The OC itself, however, gives way to the NC when we embrace Jesus as our personal Savior and live in harmony with His will and way.

The fact is that the 10 Commandments represent a summary of all that is ethical and moral, which doesn't deny the fact that in the ceremonial laws there are also moral principles, which apply to all who identify as God's children.

God writes on the hearts and minds everything that is moral, ethical, appropriate. The health laws had many details regarding hygienic measures that won't apply to our times, but the principles that have to do with our best well being certainly are preserved under the New Covenant, for our bodies continue being temples of the Holy Spirit.

I don't think that in the OT we find this emphasis as Paul gives to the sanctity of the body, but that certainly is not a novelty, a new perspective just from Christ's time on. Always God's people had their bodies as temples of the Holy Spirit, so the preoccupation with the best health principles goes on under the New Covenant, as they have no symbolic character, pointing to Christ's expiation that would justify their demise.

Have a blessed Sabbath y'all. . .

like this?

The people ... readily entered into covenant with God. Feeling that they were able to establish their own righteousness, they declared, "All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient." Exodus 24:7. ... {PP 371.4}

You say "if not in particular then in principle". Certainly no one would disagree with this! Given you're referencing judgments which are, by definition, amplifications of the moral law, then, of course, in principle these would still be binding, since the principle is the moral law, and the moral law is binding. The whole question involves the particulars. If these were judgments particularly adapted to the circumstances of the Israelites, then they wouldn't need to be binding on us, although the principles upon which they were based (i.e., the moral law) is.



What happened to the Sermon on the Mount?



Where is there even the least hint in anything Jesus Christ's life or character in His humanity that suggests that "Capital punishment is an integral part of God's covenant and character."?

I don't see how one can read what Jesus Christ lived, said, and taught and think this.

Fortunately we have at our disposal other insights Ellen White shared regarding the covenant made at Sinai:


As you can see, not all was doom and gloom when God and the COI entered into a solemn covenant at Sinai. Yes, they were negative aspects we should avoid today. But there were also positive aspects that we should imitate today. "All that the LORD hath spoken we will do." In commenting on this pledge, Ellen White wrote:

"The covenant that God made with His people at Sinai is to be our refuge and defense. . . This covenant is of just as much force today as it was when the Lord made it with ancient Israel. . . This is the pledge that God's people are to make in these last days. Their acceptance with God depends on a faithful fulfilment of the terms of their agreement with Him. God includes in His covenant all who will obey Him."

As I see it, she is describing those aspects of the OC that should be a part of our experience under the NC. Do you see what I mean?

What if the COI had successfully fulfilled her purpose and mission? Then what? Wouldn't the whole world have been under God under her government? Wouldn't all of her "judgments and laws" have been binding upon everyone? Yes, I believe it would have been so. My point is, no, her "judgments and laws" were not supposed to be limited to the Jews; they were supposed to govern everyone everywhere as the inhabitants of the earth embraced her ways and the truth about God Almighty.

Yes, the "judgments and laws" were founded on the moral law both in principle and in particular. And, yes, this includes capital punishment. Capital punishment is an amplification of the truths inherent in the moral law of God. The moral law can only condemn sinners to death. It cannot pardon or save them from sin. Thus, capital punishment is consistent with law and justice. The punishment and death of Jesus on the cross speaks eloquently of these truths. Listen:

The law of God's government was to be magnified by the death of God's only-begotten Son. Christ bore the guilt of the sins of the world. Our sufficiency is found only in the incarnation and death of the Son of God. He could suffer, because sustained by divinity. He could endure, because He was without one taint of disloyalty or sin. Christ triumphed in man's behalf in thus bearing the justice of punishment. He secured eternal life to men, while He exalted the law, and made it honorable. {1SM 302.1}

The principles of justice required a faithful narration of facts for the benefit of all who should ever read the Sacred Record. Here we discern the evidences of divine wisdom. We are required to obey the law of God, and are not only instructed as to the penalty of disobedience, but we have narrated for our benefit and warning the history of Adam and Eve in Paradise, and the sad results of their disobedience of God's commands. The account is full and explicit. The law given to man in Eden is recorded, together with the penalty accruing in case of its disobedience. Then follows the story of the temptation and fall, and the punishment inflicted upon our erring parents. Their example is given us as a warning against disobedience, that we may be sure that the wages of sin is death, that God's retributive justice never fails, and that He exacts from His creatures a strict regard for His commandments. When the law was proclaimed at Sinai, how definite was the penalty annexed, how sure was punishment to follow the transgression of that law, and how plain are the cases recorded in evidence of that fact! {4T 11.3}

God has given in His word decisive evidence that He will punish the transgressors of His law. Those who flatter themselves that He is too merciful to execute justice upon the sinner, have only to look to the cross of Calvary. The death of the spotless Son of God testifies that "the wages of sin is death," that every violation of God's law must receive its just retribution. Christ the sinless became sin for man. He bore the guilt of transgression, and the hiding of His Father's face, until His heart was broken and His life crushed out. All this sacrifice was made that sinners might be redeemed. In no other way could man be freed from the penalty of sin. And every soul that refuses to become a partaker of the atonement provided at such a cost must bear in his own person the guilt and punishment of transgression. {GC 539.3}

To our merciful God the act of punishment is a strange act. "As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked." Ezekiel 33:11. The Lord is "merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, . . . forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin." Yet He will "by no means clear the guilty." The Lord is slow to anger, and great in power, and will not at all acquit the wicked." Exodus 34:6, 7; Nahum 1:3. By terrible things in righteousness He will vindicate the authority of His downtrodden law. The severity of the retribution awaiting the transgressor may be judged by the Lord's reluctance to execute justice. The nation with which He bears long, and which He will not smite until it has filled up the measure of its iniquity in God's account, will finally drink the cup of wrath unmixed with mercy. {GC 627.2}

MM, it's very clear to me that you've misunderstood what she wrote. One can see this by both looking at Scripture, and looking at things she wrote elsewhere, both herself, and by way of endorsements of the positions of others.

I'll give examples of each of these.

First of all, Scripture:



This brings out that the OT was a negative thing. It wasn't something to be continued, but to be replaced. The key feature here is having the law written in the heart. This is absent from the OT, and why it is a negative thing that needs to be replaced, rather than continued.

Ellen White agreed:



Here's the same distinction Jeremiah made.

1.Old Covenant = law written on stones, rather than on the heart = bad.
2.New Covenant = law written on the heart = good.

Also

1.Old Covenant = going about to establish our own righteousness = bad.

2.New Covenant = we accept the righteousness of Christ = good.

Another Scripture:



1.Old Covenant = bondage = bad.
2.New Covenant = freedom = good.

Another Scripture:



The Old Covenant was replaced by a "better covenant" which is founded on "better promises."

The following is from E. J. Waggoner:



Everything is explained clearly in this one paragraph. A careful reading of this paragraph contains all the principles needed to understand the puzzle.

From the SOP:







From this we see that:
1.If Waggoner's position was the same as EGW's in PP, then Waggoner had the truth.
2.Waggoner had the truth.
3.Therefore his position was the same as hers in PP.

So, unless she contradicted herself, the quote you presented must be in harmony with what she wrote in PP, and with Waggoner, and, presumably, with Jeremiah and Paul in both Galatians and Hebrews. So on your side of the question is:

1.A single quote from a source which is not Ellen White's principle treatment of the subject, and not the source which she herself set out as the standard by which to judge whether or not Waggoner had the truth.

on the other side is:

1.Scripture, from Jeremiah to Paul, telling us that the Old Covenant was defective, led to bondage, and was inferior because in it the law is not written in the heart.
2.Ellen White saying the same thing in PP.
3.Waggoner's comments.
4.Ellen White's endorsement of Waggoner's comment.

The evidence is stacked against the position you are suggesting. The obvious answer is that there's another way to interpret the quote you cited, which would be in agreement with items 1 through 4. I think such an interpretation is easy to find. Ellen White was endorsing the sentiment behind the words "All that the Lord has said, we will do," given a New Covenant interpretation to what were originally Old Covenant words.

As a start to considering this, please take the following into account:

1.The Old Covenant leads to bondage.
2.In the Old Covenant the law is written on stone, as opposed to in the heart.
3.In the Old Covenant, one goes about trying to establish one's own righteousness, whereas in the New Covenant, one one accepts the righteousness of Christ.