Comment on What does it take to be a true Seventh-day Adventist? by Sean Pitman.
I can’t believe you would say this, Sean. Surely you do not really believe it….
“The Ten Commandments aren’t really The Moral Law. They are only reflections of the real, underlying, moral Code – i.e., the Royal Law of Love.”
Here, like many, you seperate the motive to obey the objective law of 10 commandments and claim the 10 commandments are not the moral law.
I don’t understand your suprise? Have you not read where Jesus made this very same observation? The Ten Commandments are simply reflections of the real underlying moral law – the Royal Law of Love.
It is because of this fact that the angels in heaven were surprised to discover that there was any kind of moral law at all. They didn’t need a written law because they naturally obeyed the Royal Law. If one naturally obeys the Royal Law, the written law is pointless. The purpose of the written law is to quicken the conscience regarding the fact that one isn’t obeying the Royal Law (even though one already knows this deep down since the Royal Law is still written on the hearts of all).
In this regard, consider the following passage:
And a lawyer stood up and put Him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” And He said to him, “What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?” And he answered, “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself.” And He said to him, “You have answered correctly; do this and you will live” Luke 10:25-29
Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” Matthew 22:34-40
Notice that Jesus explains that the Law of Love is the basis of every other law – to include the Ten Commandments. Notice also that the lawyer did not reference the Ten Commandments when Jesus asked him what was written in the Law.
The Ten Commandments simply put into words general rules of thumb on how one should love one’s neighbor and one’s God. There are, of course, situations where the most loving thing to do would be to break one of the written commandments… as Jesus explains:
At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath, and His disciples became hungry and began to pick the heads of grain and eat. But when the Pharisees saw this, they said to Him, “Look, Your disciples do what is not lawful to do on a Sabbath.” But He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he became hungry, he and his companions, how he entered the house of God, and they ate the consecrated bread, which was not lawful for him to eat nor for those with him, but for the priests alone? “Or have you not read in the Law, that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and are innocent? “But I say to you that something greater than the temple is here. “But if you had known what this means, ‘I desire compassion, and not a sacrifice’ you would not have condemned the innocent. – Matthew 12:1-7
You see, the Royal Law trumps written laws every time. God desires a pure motive of love and compassion, not simply cold adherence to the written law – i.e., the Ten Commandments. Cold adherence to the written law is a Pharisaical approach to salvation – which won’t save anyone. Salvation and true goodness is based on a loving relationship with God.
That’s it. That’s what makes one holy. The rest will come naturally once one learns to obey the Royal Law.
Again, if it could be possible, mere obedience, even perfect obedience, to the Ten Commandments wouldn’t save anyone or make anyone truly good. What is required by God to be “good” is a change of heart, a change of motive. The lack of correct knowledge or even action isn’t our problem. Our sin problem is based on a lack of a correct motive.
I don’t know who would read our dialogue and draw any conclusion of what is true or not. But I can say, concerning myself, there is nothing you have stated that would change my mind of how I understand the bible.
That’s because you refuse to seriously consider the simple question I’ve posed to you many times now – i.e., What is the key element that makes humans moral beings while animals or robots are not moral beings? What’s they key difference?
You claim ignorance eliminates guilt. This means when we are judged, Jesus does not plead forgiveness for sins of ignorance, He claims innocence. No need for pardon if we are not guilty.
That would be the case if we truly were completely ignorant of the Royal Law of Love. If such were the case, we would be like animals, not knowing good from evil. Jesus would not have had to die in such a situation.
If all that was lacking on our part was knowledge, we would not be needing new hearts. We would only be needing a bit of head knowledge is all. Such would not have require the blood of Jesus to obtain.
Head knowledge is very very easy for God to provide – if that was all that was needed to correct aberrant actions on our part. A change of heart, a creation of a new heart, on the other hand, is much much more difficult for God to provide. It cost Him everything. He had to empty all of heaven to pay the price for such an infinite Gift…
Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com
Sean Pitman Also Commented
What does it take to be a true Seventh-day Adventist?
I guess someone who accepts neo-Darwinism must have some problems with the reality of Biblical prophecy…
What does it take to be a true Seventh-day Adventist?
You didn’t answer my question as to what you would do if you happened to have been in a place like Sandy Hook Elementary School when a shooter entered the building. Or, what you would do if someone threatened the lives of your own family. Also, don’t tell me that Australia has no police force or that the police there don’t carry guns…
What does it take to be a true Seventh-day Adventist?
The Bible and Ellen White are very clear that Satan and his angels were forced to leave heaven just as Adam and Eve were forced to leave Eden after they fell to Satan’s charms. They are also very clear that the wicked will one day be excluded, by force, from the New Jerusalem and will, eventually, be completely destroyed from existence. I don’t think that’s how it worked with you and your family…
Recent Comments by Sean Pitman
After the Flood
Thank you Ariel. Hope you are doing well these days. Miss seeing you down at Loma Linda. Hope you had a Great Thanksgiving!
The Flood
Thank you Colin. Just trying to save lives any way I can. Not everything that the government does or leaders do is “evil” BTW…
The Flood
Only someone who knows the future can make such decisions without being a monster…
Pacific Union College Encouraging Homosexual Marriage?
Where did I “gloss over it”?
Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
I fail to see where you have convincingly supported your claim that the GC leadership contributed to the harm of anyone’s personal religious liberties? – given that the GC leadership does not and could not override personal religious liberties in this country, nor substantively change the outcome of those who lost their jobs over various vaccine mandates. That’s just not how it works here in this country. Religious liberties are personally derived. Again, they simply are not based on a corporate or church position, but rely solely upon individual convictions – regardless of what the church may or may not say or do.
Yet, you say, “Who cares if it is written into law”? You should care. Everyone should care. It’s a very important law in this country. The idea that the organized church could have changed vaccine mandates simply isn’t true – particularly given the nature of certain types of jobs dealing with the most vulnerable in society (such as health care workers for example).
Beyond this, the GC Leadership did, in fact, write in support of personal religious convictions on this topic – and there are GC lawyers who have and continue to write personal letters in support of personal religious convictions (even if these personal convictions are at odds with the position of the church on a given topic). Just because the GC leadership also supports the advances of modern medicine doesn’t mean that the GC leadership cannot support individual convictions at the same time. Both are possible. This is not an inconsistency.
