#2
My point regarding "Are you a Protestant or a Catholic" was to show that traditionalist Seventh-day Adventists have the same concept of Justification by Faith as Catholics, which is totally the opposite of the reformation concept and the rest of Protestantism.

Of course you are correct to say both Protestants and Catholics should follow God's commandments in loving others, but this is not what I was saying here.

#3
You don't seem to understand the point here. Are the Ten Commandments the words of the Old Covenant? Clearly the Bible says they are. We should treat them the same as the Old Covenant. What you say is correct with regard to the Old Covenant. For example you seem to regard it as significant that "It was specifically mentioned that the TEN COMMANDMENTS were written upon those tablets! " but this is not in dispute here, the stone tablets where the foundation of the Old Covenant. You also say "To say the old covenant was the ten commands is saying the commandments had the ability to save people under the old covenant, which they did not". Again, I am certainly not saying this - I am simply pointing out that the Bible teaches that the Ten Commandments were the words of the Old Covenant.

#4
Firstly you should beware of the following "It takes too much time to look up all his arguments" - it doesn't take too much time to search for the truth. For the other points you make the New Testament doesn't refer to a "ceremonial law", also you don't win an argument by saying "The difference is obvious! " you are supposed to quote texts. Regarding the claim that the moral law is not abolished, of course no one is saying it is, but the moral law is not the Ten Commandments, and it is not the Old Covenant.

#5
You write:
"Just because a person doesn't have "ceremonial law" "moral law" spelled out, they can still see that the practice of sacrificing lambs and goats, etc. has ended, but the law forbidding murder, stealing, lying and adultery, worshiping other gods, etc. is still very much in force in the NT."

Again, you need some texts to support your argument. I agree that "the law forbidding murder, stealing, lying and adultery, worshiping other gods, etc. is still very much in force in the NT." but I do so on the grounds that Paul and the other New Testament writers give - that this is the moral law that everyone Jew and Gentile know - not that it is the Ten Commandments.

You continue:
"According to this critic, the law always refers to the Torah, or the whole book of Moses. So by this is he saying it would mean that God is writing the TORAH upon the hearts of new covenant Christians- while the ten commandments, which according to his definition, is the old covenant is abolished! Talk about getting things backwards and then attacking others who agree with the Bible that it is the earthly sanctuary services which are ended, being fulfilled by Christ's death and work in the heavenly sanctuary, but the moral law is still applicable to our lives and is written upon the hearts of God's children."

You are getting confused here. What the New Testament argues is that there is a moral law of God which both Jew (through the Torah) and Gentile (because they just know it) know. This is God's "law". This is what the Torah pointed to - essentially a moral, not ceremonial law. Just replace "Ten Commandments" with "moral law" and you've just about got it. The New Testament clearly makes this distinction on many occasions, which you can discover by re-reading the original articles. By "law" the New Testament (and indeed Bible writers) all mean the Torah. However clearly the New Testament writers don't think we should keep the Old Covenant - does that mean we abolish the law (Torah)? No, because we are keeping the reality which the law pointed to, which is Christ.

#6
Jesus asking the Jews keeping the Old Covenant isn't blasphemy! This was what God required of them.

You claim: "Jesus is not referring to the whole TORAH - the commandments are quoted right there in the passage! They are all from the last six of the ten commandments and then Jesus sums them up as "love your neighbor."

Of course Jesus quotes from the Ten Commandments - as do other New Testament writers (you also quote Paul). But they also quote from the rest of the Torah, and Jesus quote to "love your neighbor" of also from the Torah, but not from the Ten Commandments.

#7
Why don't you address any of the points I am making here? Do you not accept that "the law and the prophets" is used to refer to the Old Testament?

You also make the following points: Read on - the text continues and says the person who breaks and teaches others to break God's law receives the lowest possible marks in the kingdom of heaven. Not only that, Jesus tells us that we must keep the commandments MORE fully - not do away with them!

I agree, of course I have read on and I believe I have commented on this passage also.

You say:
He magnifies the moral law in this chapter (Matt. 5) he certainly does not abolish it. Are you going to tell me the WORDS OF THE SON OF GOD HIMSELF do not apply to ALL people. Did not God speak to US "by His Son, Who is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of His being. (Hebrews 1:1-2) How could any finite, mortal human being, stand up and say Christ's words do not apply to Gentiles? Christ also said heaven and earth would pass away before the law passes away- seems heaven and earth are still here.

Are you saying the Torah applies to all people? This is the implication of what you are saying here. Regarding the law not passing away - again the Old Testament and Old Covenant have not been destroyed but they have been fulfilled.

Your next point:
Gentiles can lie, steal, kill, commit adultery, covet, swear, worship Idols etc. all in the effort to escape the Sabbath. --- HARDLY TRUE- I can't buy that logic. We already know why there is this campaign against God's holy, righteous law. It is to destroy God's Sabbath of rest and enforce a man made tradition in it's place, for even if the critic himself is not aware of where he is pushing people, all roads lead to the final showdown. That showdown is: will we be engaged in the vain worship of the beast of Revelation, or will be among the patient saints who keep God's commandments and have not set them aside to honor the traditions of men.

Does not keeping the Old Covenant mean we can "lie, steal, kill, commit adultery, covet, swear, worship Idols etc"? No, no one has said that either you keep the Old Covenant or you can do anything you like. We are now under the new law of love.

#8
You claim the Ten Commandments are in every covenant:

Of course the critic is building on the false idea that the old covenant is the ten commandments which God made with Israel. However the commandments are part of EVERY covenant- they are part of the EVERLASTING covenant - God's covenant of salvation and restoration to sinners who have broken His God's laws and who will respond to His mercy.

However I don't find them in the covenants God makes with Noah and Abraham - perhaps you could quote the text?

Again, you are assuming either we keep the Old Covenant God made with Israel, or there we can do what we like.

Just because
"Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws." Yes, Abraham obeyed God's direct charge to him, but how could he also obey those commandments and statutes and laws if there were no commandments, statutes and laws before Sinai?

Doesn't mean Abraham kept the New Moons, Sabbaths and other parts of the Covenant with Moses. The Covenant with Moses isn't the only covenant God makes!

#9
I don't agree with your claim that to understand John's use of "law" and "commandment" we need to look at the other New Testament writers. John is clearly making a distinction the other writers are not making, so to include Matthew in "understanding" what John is doing is pointless. Your whole response is based on the idea that we ignore the fact that John chooses to make a point by treating the two words differently.

It isn't the case that:
"We now have the freedom to define what is right and wrong in are own eyes- we make up our own commandments, where we determine what is right". Read through the New Testament, there is plenty of guidance on how Christians should live, but it doesn't come from the Old Covenant, but from the example of Christ.

#10
This statement is unbelievable:
"First declaring that the covenant is the ten commandments and then saying the Psalmist is not speaking of the commandments, but praising the covenant between God and Israel. "

If you haven't understood that I am claiming the Ten Commandments are part of the Old Covenant I feel like giving up. The Ten Commandments are part of the Old Covenant. The Psalmist is referring to the commandments of the Old Covenant. He is praising the whole law, because although you may find it diffficult to understand the Jews actually loved the whole law God gave them.

#11
Again, you don't seem to have an answer to the fact that John uses the term "commandment" in a particular way. I agree the other writers don't treat "commandment" as particularly special, so you don't make your point by using the other writers.

#12
I wasn't trying to hide anything in the reference to the Gentiles. Paul's point it that the Gentiles know what is right and wrong and this is basically what the Torah is teaching us, so basically both the Jews and the Gentiles know right and wrong and so are guilty.

You ask "They DO THE THINGS CONTAINED IN THE LAW....so do they do the whole TORAH?" but the same point could be made if you assume Paul is referring to the Ten Commandments here. However note that (a) historically all writings of the time refer to the Torah as the law, (b) the rest of the Bible refers to the Torah as the law, so it would be rather incredible if Paul here decided to use the term differently. However the point Paul is making is not that the Gentiles keep all the feasts and sacrifices of the Jews, but that they know basically what is right and wrong. The same point could be put to someone arguing the "law" here refers to the Ten Commandments - do the Gentiles have no other Gods but Jehovah? Do they not make any graven images? Do they keep the Sabbath? Paul is really just saying everyone knows right and wrong.

#13
Interesting that you say: "includes Daniel's statement "he shall think to change times and laws" Does this mean man will make a decree to change God's commandment)" as that is exactly what Adventists believe!

I agree with you that of course words used to refer to the law are also used to refer to other commands. Also that sometimes other words are used to refer to the law. The point - which you do not appear to dispute - is that the "law" is treated as a whole - the whole Old Covenant. It does not refer to the Ten Commandments, but to the whole law.

#14
Why do you say:
Again there is the constant belittling of Christ in these debates. The words and life of Christ are all swept away as not meaningful to the Gentiles. Yet, He is the Word of life - He is the ONE we should listen to and see as our example.

Jesus was a Jew and acted like one! This is only "belittling" if you think acting as a Jew is belittling.

Another revealing comment:
As far as the circumcision law--
1 Corinthians 7.19
"Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God." Please note again how the commandments are defined-
They are the commandments of GOD!

Paul is not referring here to the "circumcision law" but to the Old Covenant - as is clear from the other arguments presented. The big debate regarding circumcision in the New Testament is not about one particular law, but about whether the Gentiles are under the Old Covenant. Paul answers that they are not, they are under the new law of Christ.

#15
A number of errors in your argument:

1. The Sabbath (Gen. 2:1-3) and Marriage sanctity (Gen. 2:24) were established in Eden, not at Sinai. There is no way either has been abolished for the present age

The point you have not contended is that in Eden the Sabbath was not an evening and morning sabbath as presented in the Old Covenant, but God's eternal rest into which we should all enter.

2. the ten commandments are still the foundational principles of the moral law.

Nowhere have you shown that the Bible teaches that the Ten Commandments are the moral law.

3. We've also already discussed that the command to "Love your neighbor" is often placed at the end of a recitation of the last six commandments. The phrase is the sum up of the last six commandments. That's what the phrase is doing in Matt. 19:19. (Also Romans 13:10, James 2:8,11)

The phrase is from the Torah and is used by Bible writers to refer to where the Torah asks you to love you neighbour.

4. Yes, Jesus often redefined the "laws of Moses" BUT you will notice in this, and every instance - he did NOT abolish the ten commandments, but magnified them. He attacked the petty rules, but always lifted up the principles of the ten commandments and explained them with a more internal relevance (don't kill - don't even hate)

What are you calling the law of Moses? The whole of the Torah including the Ten Commandments is the law of Moses.

Are you saying Jesus abolished the law of Moses but didn't abolish the Ten Commandments? Jesus says he did not come to abolish the law (Matt 5:17).

The moral law is not the Ten Commandments - see I Cor 13 for example.

#16
As you admitted earlier, "Torah" is not found in the New Testament, so you are being misleading claiming "Paul does not refer to the TORAH", what Paul does refer to is what you admitted is a standard term for law in the New Testament. It is no surprise that to refer to the Old Covenant Paul cites the "words of the Covenant".

You claim Paul is not referring to the Old Covenant or Torah when referring to "the law" - yet he quotes from the words of the Covenant! There is nothing here to show Paul is referring to anything other than what is usually referred to as "the law" i.e. the law of the Jews. There is just nowhere that says "the law" means "the Ten Commandments alone and not the rest of the Old Covenant".

Look at where Paul refers to the circumcision and the law, Rom 2:25 "circumcision is of value if you observe the law". What law is this? The Ten Commandments? Of course not - circumcision was part of the Old Covenant.

Read Paul in Gal 4:24 "One covenant is Mount Sinai and bears children who are slaves". The law means the Old Covenant. Read the books of the law and you will find they are all about the Old Covenant.

#17
You claim I want to "lead us straight into Babylon, where God's laws are replaced by man's laws, feelings and rationalizations". In fact I am arguing that the law refers to the Old Covenant and we should obey the law of Christ. If you feel the law of Christ means "man's laws, feelings and rationalizations" you misunderstand Christ's law. If you don't believe this, you are deliberately misrepresenting my views.

#18
You appear to think Paul was a blasphemer then:
"for apart from the law, sin is dead, once I was alive apart from the law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died" (Rom 7:9)

The law by itself not only cannot make anyone good, but according to the New Testatment actually causes an increase in sin.

#19
Again, you repeat the same old errors.

Yes, the Ten Commandments are separate to the other laws in the Old Covenant, because these are the special "words of the Covenant", they represent the whole thing. That doesn't make them separate from the Old Covenant, but even more part of it.

Your claim "Yes, the TEN COMMANDMENTS are part of the covenant, the everlasting covenant! " is not Biblical.

You claim "The old covenant contained the whole ceremonial system (a model of the gospel-- mercy and forgiveness were found in the sanctuary services", but this is to misunderstand the Old Covenant. It was the whole of the books of the law. Not just ceremonies, but lots of other laws - including moral laws - as well.

#20
These chapters are simply examples of Bacchiocchi side-stepping the basic issue of the Old Covenant. The central question in the New Testament is should the Gentiles who have converted to Christianity keep the Old Covenant, i.e. the Torah. This is what all the discussion on circumcision is about. Are the Gentiles to keep the same Covenant as the Jews? Bacchiocchi appears to admit that "law" refers to this Old Covenant, then later believes the Old Testament laws can be assessed apart from the covenant they represent - so we can somehow have a "moral" and "spiritual" version of the Torah. But what is the point? Now Christ has come the reality is there for all to see. There is no need to try to go through the Torah and "re-interpret" what each particular law should mean to a Christian, for we are not even under that covenant any more, but under God's new Covenant.

#21
Another amazing statement:
"Hebrews says the old covenant is gone, and the earthly sanctuary services are gone, it does not in any place say the commandments of God are gone. "

You consistently appear to believe "old covenant" equals "earthly sanctuary services". You made this mistake in #19 above also. PLEASE READ THE BOOKS OF THE LAW. They will show you the Old Covenant was not a few sanctuary services. The old Covenant contains what are referred to as the "the law". This is what this debate is all about. The purpose of Hebrews is to explain the Old Covenant has been replaced by a New Covenant, not that some of the Old Covenant - the sanctuary services - have been replaced.

You say:
But Paul's very frequent encouragement of believers to high standards IS backed with references to the ten commandments quite frequently.

Please show me where this is the case.

You state:
"Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience." What are we to obey?

Interesting that you can't think of anything apart from the Ten Commandments to disobey! What about the new commandments of love?

Regarding the reformers you write: The reformers would, and often did, give their lives to free us from the heavy hand of persecution of the Roman Catholic Church.

How sad they would be that one of the protestant churches - the Seventh-day Adventist - has now turned its back on the central pillar of the reformation, Justification by Faith, and is now following doctrines identical to those of Catholicism. Unfortunately your views on the law are a part of this tragic error. All I can ask is that you read the Bible with prayer and humility, and not with your eyes clouded by the deluded doctrines you hold dearer than the truth of God.

Please think seriously about what I have said, it really is the truth.

John