The Balaam Factor

We have a very special question that I developed when I found a syllabus of a certain anti-Sabbath Christian apologist in which he presented, among many arguments on the law-was-abolished line of thought, the text of Hebrews 8:6-10. Said passage makes reference to the New Covenant, or New Testament, in which God is willing to write what is called "My laws" on the hearts and minds of those who accept the terms of that New Covenant.

He tried to convince his readers that these "My laws" would mean something of a new Christian law that left the Sabbath commandment out of the picture (but, strangely, not any of the other nine of the Decalogue).

When I read that, I thought: "Wait a minute! Here it says, 'My laws', and not 'My new laws'! And since the text is a mere reproduction of Jeremiah 31:31-33, when the same promise was made to Israel, then why is this man alleging that what God proposes to write in the minds and on the hearts of those who accept the New Covenant [New Testament] would have a different law? It is THE SAME that was known by the prophet Jeremiah!"

Of course all those elements that were prefigurations of Christ's sacrifice are not included because when Hebrews was written, both his author and his primary readers already knew that the temple's veil had been rent from top to bottom, signifying the end of all ceremonial aspects of the law. But none of the commandments of the moral law had its end at that time.

Thus, this Sabbath opposer's allegation became rather an inspiration for me to formulate the question below, which has already versions in Portuguese, Spanish, English, French, German and now. . . Kiswahili, a language widely spoken throughout the African continent.

I would say that what we have here is the "Balaam Factor" in action. All certainly remember the Bible episode of that apostate prophet of Israel who went to the Israelite's enemies side, and was "hired" to utter a curse on God's people, but by the Lord's interference, the curse was reversed into a blessing to Israel.

So, that criticism against the Sabbath truth became a blessing to show the error of such reasoning, and now we are publicizing this question, that both Sunday keepers and adepts of the more "user friendly" nodayism/anydayism/everydayism are unable to answer, as I have tested it time after time.

The fact is that the equation they try to establish: NEW COVENANT = NEW LAW continues without being resolved satisfactorily. It's simply not so. . .

Well, below is the question, first in English, then in our most recent international version, Kiswahili, that a brother from Kenya kindly translated for us, and finally in French, that we composed also recently.

If you know any other languages and could volunteer to put it into a different one, please send me a note about. God will reward you richly because I am quite convinced that it is an important evangelistic tool:

English Version:

Where is it written that in the change from the Old to the New Covenant, when God writes what is called “My laws” in the hearts and minds of those who accept the terms of the New Covenant [New Testament] (Heb. 8:6-10), transferring the contents of the cold tables of stone to the hearts warmed by the divine grace (2 Cor. 3:2-7), God

a) leaves out the 4th commandment of the moral law;

b) includes the 4th commandment, but changing the sanctity of the 7th to the 1st day of the week?

OR

c) includes the 4th commandment, but as a vague, voluntary and variable principle that can be reinterpreted as any day which is most convenient to the believer (or his employer)?

ALSO:

d) leaves out the dietary rules regarding unclean/clean meats?

Basic texts: Hebrews 8:6-10; Jeremiah 31:31-33; Ezekiel 11:19, 20 and 36:26, 27.


Kiswahili Version:

Ni wapi imeandikwa ya kwamba kutoka agano la Kale hadi Agano Jipya, wakati Mungu anapoandika kile anachoita “Sheria Zangu” katika mioyo na kwenye nia za wale wanaokubali masharti za Agano Jipya (Ebr. 8:6-10), zikihamisha vyote vilivyomo katika vile vibao vya mawe baridi kwa mioyo zinazopata moto kwa neema ya mbinguni (2 Kor. 3:2-7), Mungu

a) aliacha amri ya nne katika torati;

b) alizingatia amri ya nne, lakini akaibadili utakatifu ya siku ya saba hadi siku ya kwanza ya juma?

AU

c) alizingatia amri ya nne, lakini kama kanuni lizilo dhahiri, la hiari, na bila sharti lolote na amabalo linaweza kufasiriwa kama siku yeyote inayofaa zaidi kwa mwaminifu (ama tajiri wake)?

TENA:

d) aliacha masharti za chakula yanayohusu nyama najisi/safi?

Vifungu: Waebrania 8:6-10; Yeremia 31:31-33; Ezekieli 11:19,20 na 36:26,27; Isaya 66:16-18.


French Version:

Où est-il dite dans l'Écriture Sainte qui quand Dieu écrit ce qui s’appelle les “mes lois” dans les coeurs et les esprits de ceux qui acceptent les termes de Son nouveau concert (Nouveau Testament), les transférant des froids tables de pierre aux coeurs chauffés par la grace divine (voir 2 Cor. 3:2, 3.,6 et 7), Il

a) laisse excepté le 4ême. commandement de la loi morale (du décalogue biblique, non du décalogue contrefait des catecismes catholiques)

b) inclut le 4ême. commandement, mais en changeant la sainteté du septième au premier jour de la semaine?

OU

c) inclut le 4ème. commandement, mais comme un principe vague, volontaire et variable, que n'importe être suivi littéralement comme la Bible dit, dans le septième jour comme Mémorial de la Création, mais chacun pouvant choisir le temps qui plus lui conviendra (ou à son employeur) pour consacrer à Dieu.

AUSSI:

d) exclut les règles de restrictions alimentaires sur des viandes immondes?

Textes basiques: Hébreux 8:6-10; Jérémie 31:31-33; Ézéchiel 36:26, 27; Ésaïe 66:15-18.

Well, you know the Portuguese version, you could post that. (Probably Spanish too, right?)


Tom

Uhm, considering some facts such as Israel marching through an area where none in their family had been too since Jacob left for Egypt, there is no good ground on saying that Balaam was an apostate Israelii prophet, but more likely was a pagan prophet who happened upon God.

As to your main principle, considering that your premise is the law once written on stone now being rewritten on the heart, you might want to consider that God never wrote the food laws on stone. By adding these from Leviticus, you open up for questions conserning why you leave out other laws which are written just before and after in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Things such as the uncleanness of women giving birth and the circumsicion of boys directly following in Leviticus, or the command in Deuteronomy that the tithe of people who live far away from Gods sanctuary should be turned into money which should then be used to a big feast. The tither is here commanded to buy ox and sheep meat, wine and strong drink and he and his family shall eat and rejoice in Gods presence. This doesnt skip a beat from the list of may and may not eats in De 14.

I am not convinced, as to, what is the important evangelistic tool? Perhaps it got lost on me in translation?

The evangelistic tool is for those who face objections as to the validity of God's law, expressed in the Ten Commandments, as applicable under the New Covenant.

Regading the other laws, as the dietary rules, are they prefigurative in any way of Christ's sacrifice on the cross, as were the other laws? If they are for our good (and they certainly are), then a Christian would just have benefits in abiding to them.

On March 12, a piece of news on the "Morning Edition" program of the NPR radio stations network (USA) reported about the possibility of new diseases brought into the country by people who bring wild animal meats from Africa to the US, which would include HIV-AIDS.

Wouldn't it be wiser to just use those animals listed by God's order as apt for human consumption in His dietary laws (Lev. 11; Deut. 14), especially as in Deut. 14:3 those forbidden animals were considered "abomination"? Did God change His mind on what He considers "abomination" under the New Covenant? Why should He?

For the news feature mentioned above ("Smuggled Bushmeat Poses U.S. Health Threat", by Richard Knox), check through the following link:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7849312

Best regards

Complying with Bro. Ewal request, there goes the Portuguese, Spanish (and additionally German) translations of the challenging question:

Portuguese:

Onde é dito nas Escrituras que quando Deus escreve a Sua lei nas mentes e corações dos que aceitam os termos do Seu novo concerto (Novo Testamento), transferindo-a das frias tábuas de pedra para os corações aquecidos pela graça divina (ver 2 Cor. 3:2, 3, 6 e 7), Ele

a) deixa de fora o 4o. mandamento (do decálogo bíblico, não o do decálogo falsificado dos catecismos católicos)

b) inclui o 4o. mandamento, mas fazendo com que o domingo tome o lugar do sábado?

OU

c) inclui o 4o. mandamento, mas como um princípio vago, voluntário e variável, que tanto faz ser seguido literalmente como a Bíblia diz, no sétimo dia como Memorial da Criação, ou cada qual podendo escolher o tempo que mais lhe convier (ou a seu empregador) para dedicar a Deus.

TAMBÉM:

d) exclui as regras de restrições alimentares sobre carnes imundas?

Textos básicos: Hebreus 8:6-10; Jeremias 31:31-33; Ezequiel 36:26, 27; Isaías 66:17

Spanish:

¿Donde está escrito que en el pasaje de la Antigua para la Nueva Alianza, cuando Dios escribe lo que es llamado “Mis leyes” en los corazones y mentes de los que aceptan los términos de la Nueva Alianza [Nuevo Testamento] (Heb. 8: 6 a 10), transfiriendo el contenido de las frías tablas de piedra para los corazones calentados por la divina gracia (2a. Cor. 3:2-7), Dios

a – deja de fuera el 4o. mandamiento de la ley moral;

b – incluye el 4o. mandamiento, pero altera el día de observancia del sábado para el domingo;

Ó

c - incluye el 4o. mandamiento, pero como un principio vago, voluntario, variable, pudiendo ser reinterpretado como un día cualquier que sea más conveniente al creyente (o a su empleador);

TAMBIEN:

d) Excluye las reglas de restricción alimenticias sobre carnes inmundas?

Textos Básicos: Hebreos 8:6-10; Jeremías 31:31-33; Ezequiel 36:26, 27.

German:

Wo steht in der Heiligen Schrift, dass, wenn Gott bei all denjenigen, die den neutestamentlichen Bund akzeptieren, seine Gesetze in ihren Sinn und auf ihre Herzen schreibt, wobei sie von den kalten, steinernen Tafeln auf die durch göttliche Gnade erwärmte Herzen übertragen werden (siehe 2. Kor. 3:2,3,6,7) er (Gott)

a) das 4. Gebot aussen vor lässt? (die Rede ist vom biblischen Dekalog und nicht vom gefälschten Dekalog der katholischen Katechismen).

b) das 4. Gebot einschliesst, wobei aber der Sonntag an die Stelle des Sabbat tritt?

Oder

c) das 4. Gebot einschliesst, aber als ein ungefähres Prinzip, das heisst freiwillig und veränderlich, das entweder wörtlich erfüllt werden kann, so wie es die Bibel vorschreibt, nämlich am 7.Tag als Gedenktag der Schöpfung, oder aber ein jeder sich zeitlich so einrichten kann, wie es ihm am besten passt (oder seinem Arbeitgeber), um diese Zeit Gott zu widmen?

Ausserdem:

d) die Gesetze über das Verbot des Verzehrs unreiner Tiere ausschliesst?

Bibeltexte als Basis: Hebräer 8:6-10, Jer. 31:31-33, Hes. 36:26 und Jesaja 66:16-18.

Azenilto,

I am still interested in what you have to say concerning for instance the other things written about in Deuteronomy 14. You make a defence for the continual validity of the food laws, but you havent said anything about the other laws that are written right in the same passage. Will you defend them aswell? Notice that tithe laws aswell as food laws do not point specifically towards the cross (if you disagree and find that they do, then that be bad news for the churches economy).

I understand that the food laws don't point to the cross, as well as the tithe laws. So, why should they be abolished, when they are good for us, healthiwise, and good for the maintainance of those who are dealing with God's service?

What is wrong with keeping those principles? Don't they have to do with total dedication to God? Besides, since the unclean animals are considered "abominable" (vs. 3) and we have no information that God changed His mind about that (on the contrary, He will judge the nations at the end time for idolatry, eating pork and rat--Isaiah 66:16-18), there is no logical reason for them to have been abolished on the cross.

I have another study on this subject that is more comprehensive. See it at the following link:

http://www.maritime-sda-online.org/forum...=true#Post46698

Now, I have been posting this material in other forums and what I notice is that the real motivation behind people's objections and resistance to these principles seems to be simply. . . well, selfishness.

That applies to the Sabbath also. The tendency of many Christians is to think about carrying a cross, but since it is one made of Styrofoam. Maybe they think that Jesus didn't define the material the cross should be made of, so they can choose whatever material they prefer for the cross to be carried. . .

It's more difficult to keep a Sabbath day to the Lord. Much easier is to follow a religion that doesn't present this "restriction" to a believer. People prefer to administer their time as they please, without anyone telling what time should be dedicated to God and other activities.

And it's easier to select your own food according to how tasty they seem. . . No one telling you what to eat and what not to eat.

And the money question, that is a very sensitive matter. How I control my finances is something that is totally under my discretion, and having a church telling me that 10% of my income should be dedicated to the church's activies could seem an unaccetable intromission in my budgetary matters. . .

So, one has to assess carefully what are his/her real motivations to object to these principles that make the path to heaven somewhat narrow. . .

Thanks.

Ah, but Id think titheing deutoronomy style would be rather different. And thinking about it, it is also a form of titheing that I have never heard a tithe sermon being preached on. Lets read it here:

Deu 14:22 Tithing you shall tithe all the increase of your seed that the field yields year by year.
Deu 14:23 And you shall eat before Jehovah your God in the place which He shall choose to cause His name to dwell there, the tithe of your grain, of your wine, and of your oil, and the firstlings of your herd and of your flock; that you may learn to fear Jehovah your God all your days.
Deu 14:24 And if the way is too long for you, so that you cannot carry it, because the place is too far from you which Jehovah your God shall choose to set His name there, when Jehovah your God shall bless you;
Deu 14:25 Then you shall give it for silver, and bind up the silver in your hand. And you shall go to the place which Jehovah your God shall choose.
Deu 14:26 And you shall pay the silver for whatever your soul desires, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for fermented drink, or for whatever your soul desires. And you shall eat there before Jehovah your God, and you shall rejoice, you and your household.
Deu 14:27 And you shall not forsake the Levite who is within your gates, for he has no portion nor inheritance with you.
Deu 14:28 At the end of three years, even the same year, you shall bring forth all the tithe of your increase, and shall lay it up within your gates.
Deu 14:29 And the Levite, because he has no portion nor inheritance with you, and the alien, and the fatherless, and the widow who are within your gates shall come and shall eat and be satisfied; so that Jehovah your God may bless you in all the work of your hand which you do.

So, it says that you should take your tithe to the place that God chooses, you should bring your entire family and you should invite such people that have no family and you should invite the pastor and you should throw a party with your tithe money. Have you ever heard this text being preached in a tithe sermon? Have you ever participated in a tithe party? Have you ever made one yourself? Why or why not?

Thomas