Bible Study – The Ceremonial Law

July 3 – 9, 2022

Key Text

“[Christ Jesus] having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace.” Ephesians 2:15

Study Help: Patriarchs and Prophets, 363–373

Introduction

“We have the types and the shadows in the ceremonial laws, and these were to last until they should meet the reality.” The Review and Herald, July 15, 1890

Sunday

1 THE CEREMONIAL LAW ABOLISHED

1.a. Of what was the ceremonial law a shadow or type? Galatians 3:19; Hebrews 9:9, 10; 10:1; Hebrews 8:5

Note: “Men who claim to be teachers of the people blind the eyes of the ignorant by blending the moral law with the ceremonial, and using the texts which speak of the ceremonial law to prove that the moral law has been abolished. This is a perversion of the Scriptures. There are two distinct laws brought to view. One is the law of types and shadows, which reached to the time of Christ, and ceased when type met antitype in His death. The other is the law of Jehovah, and is as abiding and changeless as His eternal throne. After the crucifixion, it was a denial of Christ for the Jews to continue to offer the burnt offerings and sacrifices which were typical of His death.” The Signs of the Times, July 29, 1886

1.b. How long was the ceremonial law to be in force? Galatians 3:19

Note: “But there is a law which was abolished, which Christ ‘took out of the way, nailing it to His cross.’ Paul calls it ‘the law of commandments contained in ordinances.’ This ceremonial law, given by God through Moses, with its sacrifices and ordinances, was to be binding upon the Hebrews until type met antitype in the death of Christ as the Lamb of God … .” The Signs of the Times, September 4, 1884

Monday

2 SEVEN CEREMONIAL SABBATHS

2.a. Name the seven days of feasts called “sabbaths.”

1    The first day of the Passover week. Exodus 12:15; Leviticus 23:5–7; Numbers 28:17, 18

2    The seventh day of the Passover week. Exodus 12:16; Numbers 28:24, 25

3    The first day of the seventh month. Leviticus 23:24, 25; Numbers 29:1

4    The tenth day of the seventh month. Leviticus 16:29–31; 23:27–32; Numbers 29:7

5    The fifteenth day of the seventh month. Leviticus 23:34, 35; Numbers 29:12

6    The twenty-second day of the seventh month. Leviticus 23:39

7    The fiftieth day (Pentecost), known also as the “feast of weeks.” Leviticus 23:15, 16, 21; Deuteronomy 16:9, 10

 Note: “Anciently the children of Israel were commanded to keep three annual feasts each year: the Passover, the Feast of Tabernacles, and the Feast of Weeks.” The Review and Herald, December 11, 1879

2.b. What does the apostle Paul say about keeping the ceremonial sabbaths which were “a shadow of good things to come”? Colossians 2:14–17

Note: “We have the types and the shadows in the ceremonial laws, and these were to last until they should meet the reality. The sacrificial offerings were continually revealing the fact that Christ was coming to our world, and when type met antitype in the death of Christ, then the sacrificial offerings, typifying Christ, were no more of any value, but the royal law of God could not be changed. … There is no shadow in the precepts of the decalogue. The ten commandments are not a type.” The Review and Herald, July 15, 1890

“The Lamb of God was a complete and perfect offering. Types and shadows, offerings and sacrifices had no virtue after Christ’s death on the cross; but God’s law was not crucified with the Saviour.” Ibid., October 10, 1899

“In the death of Christ, the sacrificial offering ceased. The ceremonial law was done away. But by the crucifixion the law of ten commandments was established. The gospel has not abrogated the law, nor detracted one tittle from its claims.” Ibid., June 26, 1900

Tuesday

3 A SHADOW OF THE REALITY

3.a. Who was the Saviour of patriarchs, prophets, and holy men in the Old Testament? Isaiah 43:11; Hosea 13:4; John 5:39

Note: “There is no such contrast as is often claimed to exist between the Old and the New Testament, the law of God and the gospel of Christ, the requirements of the Jewish and those of the Christian dispensation. Every soul saved in the former dispensation was saved by Christ as verily as we are saved by Him today. Patriarchs and prophets were Christians. The gospel promise was given to the first pair in Eden, when they had by transgression separated themselves from God. The gospel was preached to Abraham. The Hebrews all drank of that spiritual Rock, which was Christ.” The Signs of the Times, September 14, 1882

“The Jewish services all testify of Him [Christ], pointing out the attributes of His divine character. Important truth concerning Him was veiled in types and shadows and symbols, and was to be fulfilled in Christ’s mission and ministry.” Ibid., December 10, 1894

3.b. If we were to keep the ceremonial law, offer sacrifices, and keep the feast days, (which were a shadow), what would it mean? Galatians 2:21

Note: “The ceremonial law, given by God through Moses, with its sacrifices and ordinances, was to be binding upon the Hebrews until type met antitype in the death of Christ as the Lamb of God to take away the sin of the world. Then all the sacrificial offerings and services were to be abolished.” The Review and Herald, September 27, 1881

“The ceremonial law was glorious; it was the provision made by Jesus Christ in counsel with His Father, to aid in the salvation of the race. The whole arrangement of the typical system was founded on Christ. Adam saw Christ prefigured in the innocent beast suffering the penalty of his transgression of Jehovah’s law.” Ibid., May 6, 1875

“It was Christ’s desire to leave to His disciples an ordinance [the foot washing and Communion service] that would do for them the very thing they needed—that would serve to disentangle them from the rites and ceremonies which they had hitherto engaged in as essential, and which the reception of the gospel made no longer of any force. To continue these rites would be an insult to Jehovah.” Ibid., June 14, 1898

Wednesday

4 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TWO LAWS

4.a. Where were the ten commandments written, by whom, and where were they placed? Exodus 31:18; Deuteronomy 10:1, 2. In contrast, who wrote the law of ceremonial commandments, and where was the book placed? Deuteronomy 31:24–26; Galatians 3:10

Note: “In the ark were placed the tables of stone upon which God had engraved with His own finger the ten commandments. It was made expressly for this purpose, and hence was called the ark of the covenant, and the ark of the testament, since the ten commandments were God’s covenant, and the basis of the covenant made between God and Israel.” The Signs of the Times, June 24, 1880

“Nothing written on those tables [of testimony] could be blotted out. The precious record of the law was placed in the ark of the testament.” “Ellen G. White Comments,” The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Vol. 1, 1109

“The ceremonial law was … given to Moses, and by him written in a book. But the law of ten commandments spoken from Sinai had been written by God Himself on the tables of stone, and was sacredly preserved in the ark.” Patriarchs and Prophets, 365

4.b. Name some of the ordinances contained in the book of the law. Hebrews 9:9, 10; 10:1; 2 Kings 23:21; Ezra 3:2; Nehemiah 8:14

Note: “After the completion of the tabernacle He [God] communicated with Moses from the cloud of glory above the mercy seat, and gave him full directions concerning the system of offerings and the forms of worship to be maintained in the sanctuary.” Patriarchs and Prophets, 364, 365

“Moses completed the work of writing all the laws, the statutes, and the judgments which God had given him, and all the regulations concerning the sacrificial system. The book containing these was placed in charge of the proper officers, and was for safekeeping deposited in the side of the ark.” Ibid., 466

“[D]uring the first Passover celebrated by Hezekiah, provision had been made for the daily public reading of the book of the law to the people by teaching priests. It was the observance of the statutes recorded by Moses, especially those given in the book of the covenant, which forms a part of Deuteronomy, that had made the reign of Hezekiah so prosperous.” Prophets and Kings, 392

Thursday

5 THE ONLY TRUE SACRIFICE

5.a. What was the significance of the Passover feast and the slain lamb? Exodus 12:26, 27; John 1:29; 1 Corinthians 5:7

Note: “All the ceremonies of the feast [Passover] were types of the work of Christ. The deliverance of Israel from Egypt was an object lesson of redemption, which the Passover was intended to keep in memory. The slain lamb, the unleavened bread, the sheaf of first fruits, represented the Saviour.” The Desire of Ages, 77

5.b. What was the meaning of the Day of Atonement, and what is its significance today? Leviticus 23:27–32; Isaiah 22:12–14

Note: “As you come with humble heart, you find pardon, for Christ Jesus is represented as continually standing at the altar, momentarily offering up the sacrifice for the sins of the world. He is a minister of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man. The typical shadows of the Jewish tabernacle no longer possess any virtue. A daily and yearly typical atonement is no longer to be made, but the atoning sacrifice through a mediator is essential because of the constant commission of sin. Jesus is officiating in the presence of God, offering up His shed blood, as it had been a lamb slain.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 343, 344

“We are living in the great antitypical Day of Atonement. We must individually seek God. This is a personal work. Let us draw near to God, allowing nothing to come into our efforts that would misrepresent the truth for this time. Let everyone confess, not his brother’s sin, but his own sin. Let him humble his heart before God and become so filled with the Holy Spirit that his life will show that he has been born again.” Testimonies, Vol. 9, 218

Friday

PERSONAL REVIEW QUESTIONS

1    Why was the ceremonial law added?

2    Why is it no longer appropriate to keep the ceremonial sabbaths?

3    How does God view the keeping of these rituals today?

4    What were the main differences between the two laws?

5    Explain the Day of Atonement today.

Copyright 2000, Reformation Herald Publishing Association, 5240 Hollins Road, Roanoke, Virginia 24019-5048, U.S.A.

Editorial – Types and Shadows, Part III

In the last editorial, we began looking at Colossians 2:14–17. A minimum of nine lines of evidence was given showing that the law described in this passage of Scripture could not have been the Ten Commandment Law. But it is not enough to begin to understand that this passage is not talking about the Ten Commandments. We want to know what this passage is really saying. Since very large treatises have been written about this passage, it is not possible to be exhaustive, and to conserve space, we will look one by one at a number of details.

  1. It has been recognized by Bible commentators for many years that Paul was attempting to correct certain Gnostic practices, which had crept into the church at Colossae. (Gnostics believed that they had secret knowledge about God, humanity, and the rest of the universe of which the general population was unaware.) Gnosticism was one of the major heresies which troubled the New Testament Church and which the apostles fought against so vehemently that the debate fills large sections of the New Testament. One of the major thrusts of the Gospel of John was to attack Gnostic teachings coming into the church. In 1 Timothy, 1 John, Philippians, Ephesians, and the Book of Revelation, some of the ideas of Gnosticism are again attacked. As with any major heresy, there were several branches or flavors, one of which was antinomianism (the belief that, under the gospel dispensation of grace, the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation).
  2. The Christian is not to let any person judge him in regard to eating and drinking and religious practices. Rather, he is to recognize that he will be judged by God and not by any human court. (See 1 Corinthians 4:3, 4.) In Romans 14, when Paul clearly teaches not to judge others concerning worship days, he states strongly that we will all give an account of ourselves concerning worship days to the Lord. (See Romans 14:4–13.)
  3. In addition to eating and drinking, there are three other religious observances about which the Christian is not to let any person (notice that person is singular, and this word is singular in the Greek text) judge him. These three religious observances are (1) feast, (2) new moon, and (3) sabbaths. Although the word for sabbath is in the plural, this plural word is often used in a singular sense and is often used to refer to the seventh day Sabbath. (For examples of the word sabbath used in the plural with a singular meaning in English, see Mark 1:21; 2:23, 24; Luke 4:16; 13:10; Acts 13:14; 16:13.)
  4. There is a stated reason that the Christian is not to allow any other person (i.e., a Gnostic) to judge him concerning religious observances and that is that, first of all, these religious observances are shadows of coming things. Second, these religious observances had been seized upon by Gnostics as a way to gain control of the church. Theology has been used numberless times to gain control of other people’s minds and finally to control them entirely. There are still people today with the same Gnostic attitude attempting to gain control of the church of God by dictating various practices for believers to follow in regard to eating, drinking, working, dressing, feast days, methods of Sabbath observance, ad nauseum.

To be continued . . .

Editorial – Types and Shadows, Part II

In Colossians 2:14–17, Paul speaks about a law. This passage, garbled in some Bible translations and often used by theological opponents of Seventh-day Adventists as proof texts as to why Christians do not need to keep the Sabbath, requires detailed review.

For this law, Paul gives a number of clear specifications and descriptions: (1) He says that Jesus has “wiped away that which was against us,” called the (2) “handwriting of the decrees or ordinances.” (3) These decrees or ordinances “were contrary to us.” The Greek word used means to be opposed, hostile, contrary, in opposition or opposition to someone or something. (4) This law was taken out of our midst and (5) nailed to the cross. (6) He disarmed or despoiled the rulers and authorities, exposing them and publicly triumphing over them in the cross. (7) Therefore, do not let anyone judge you in food, (8) in drink, (9) in respect of a feast, (10) of a new moon, (11) or of Sabbath or Sabbaths, (12) which things are a shadow of things about to be, (13) but the body is of Christ. (Verses 18–23 help provide contextual understanding of these verses.)

We will consider each of these specifications:

(1) According to the New Testament, it was the ceremonial law, not the moral law, which was against us. For example, Peter refers to the ceremonial law (circumcision symbolized the whole law) as a yoke which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear. (Acts 15:10.) Paul refers to it as a yoke of bondage. (Galatians 5.) The moral law, or Ten Commandments, is never referred to as a yoke of bondage but is described as a law of liberty. (James 2:10–12.)

(2) The Ten Commandments are never referred to in Scripture as being handwritten. This one fact alone proves conclusively that Paul is not here referring to them. The Ten Commandments were written by the finger of God, and not by human hand. (Exodus 24:12; 31:18.)

(3) The ceremonial law was declared by the apostles to be “contrary to us,” but the moral law is described as being given to us because God loves us, and it is not burdensome to keep. (1 John 5:3; Deuteronomy 33:2, 3.)

(4) The Ten Commandments are described as impossible to ever be taken away (Luke 16:17; Psalm 89:34), but this law is taken away. We know, therefore, that this law cannot be the Ten Commandment Law.

(5) The New Testament is definite about which law was nailed to the cross. Paul says, in Galatians 3, that there was a law added because of transgression. As explained in the previous editorial, there could not even be transgression without the moral law. The law added, because of transgression, was the ceremonial law, which was only to exist until the coming of Christ. Also, Paul says that this added law was commanded through messengers, or angels, in the hand of a mediator. He says that a mediator is not of one, but God is one. This again proves that he was not talking about the Ten Commandment Law, because it was not given through angels or messengers, nor ordained in the hand of a mediator. This law was given by God Himself, not through messengers, and it existed before there was a mediator or a need for one. (Galatians 3:19, 20.) Therefore, the law that was nailed to the cross would have to be the ceremonial law.

(7) Colossians 2:16 begins with the word, “therefore.” The context is clear that Paul is talking about the ceremonial law, not the Ten Commandments. “Therefore,” shows that what he says next continues to refer to the ceremonial law.

(8–11) Each of these descriptions would have to be referring to the ceremonial law. To make this fact absolutely certain, Paul says, in verse 17, “which things are a shadow of things to come.” The ceremonial ordinances, whether new moons, feast days, or yearly sabbaths (these yearly sabbaths were “beside the sabbaths of the Lord,” Leviticus 23:4–38), were all shadows of things to come, but the seventh day Sabbath was never a shadow of things to come. It was a memorial of creation, as distinctly stated in Exodus 20:8–11.

Editorial – Types and Shadows, Part I

Many people are being confused by teachers who are telling them that, since the cross, they are free from the law and no longer need to keep it. If this is so, then keeping the Sabbath is immaterial. Of the many arguments developed to promote the false teaching that the Sabbath is not important, one of the most fundamental is the confusion between the moral law and the ceremonial law so that texts referring to one are applied to the other. But God has, in His Word, made a clear and broad distinction between these two laws.

  1. First, God referred to the Ten Commandments as a separate and distinct law from all ceremonial laws. (See Exodus 24:12.)
  2. Second, much of what Moses wrote is not ceremonial at all, but a more complete explanation of the Ten Commandments. For example, Leviticus 18 and 20 contain a fuller explanation of the meaning and scope of the seventh commandment.
  3. A third, fundamental principle is the fact that “no lie is of the truth.” 1 John 2:21. In other words, the truth can never contradict itself; it must always harmonize and agree with itself. Ellen White wrote, concerning this principle, “All truth, whether in nature or in revelation, is consistent with itself in all its manifestations.” Patriarchs and Prophets, 114. If a Bible student discovers what appears to be a contradiction in any Bible verse concerning what the Bible teaches about the law, that person simply does not yet understand the truth, because the truth will have no contradictions against itself.

Aside from these often ignored three points, biblical evidence confirms that there are two laws—one unchangeable and eternal and the other temporary, ceasing at the cross of Christ. For lack of space, we will list briefly the points and allow the reader to study each one in more detail.

  1. The moral law existed at creation. The Sabbath is specifically mentioned as coming into existence at the end of creation week. (Genesis 2:1–3.) Paul is very explicit that there can be no transgression without a law, that Adam did sin, and that sin is not reckoned or accounted where there is no law. Even though the law was not formally given until Sinai, it existed at creation. (Romans 4:15; 5:12, 13.) A careful study of Genesis and the first part of Exodus will show that the people of those days knew each one of the precepts of this law.

The ceremonial law did not exist at creation. It was “added because of transgression.” Galatians 3:19. Without the Ten Commandment Law, there could not be a transgression, and the ceremonial law was added after man had broken the moral law and become a sinner. (See also Romans 7:7.)

  1. The moral law is spoken of in the Bible as unchangeable. It was called God’s covenant and included only what God spoke to the people. (Deuteronomy 4:13; 5:22.) It is something that God will never alter or change. (Psalm 89:34.) Jesus said, concerning this law, that it would be easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for even part of a letter to fail. (Luke 16:17.) It would certainly appear to be absolutely impossible for Jesus to make a more emphatic pronouncement that this law is unchangeable! As long as this earth is in existence and as long as the heavens exist above, this law will be in existence, unchanged. (The Sabbath commandment is the longest commandment in the Decalogue—55 words—and not part of even one letter of one of those words can be changed.)

The ceremonial law is spoken of, in the Bible, not only as something that was changed by the coming of the Messiah (Hebrews 7:12) but also as a law that was no longer in effect since His coming. (See Colossians 2:14–17; Ephesians 2:15. Several lines in both of these references show that they are speaking about the ceremonial law.)

Editorial – The Law of Moses, Part II

The writings of Paul explain the ceremonial law as contrasted with the moral law, which is the law that defines right from wrong. Paul says, “I would not have known sin [what sin is] except through the law.” (Romans 7:7.) Later in the verse he quotes from the tenth commandment, indicating that except for the law that says you shall not covet, he would not have known that coveting was wrong.

In Galatians 3:19, he asks, “Why was the law given then?” which could be translated, “What purpose then is there for the law [the ceremonial law]?” He immediately answers this question: “It [the ceremonial law] was added because of transgression.” Paul says in Romans 4:15 that where there is no law, there is no transgression. In order for transgression to have occurred, a law had to exist first. What law was transgressed? It was the Ten Commandment law, the moral law which is eternal and unchangeable. What was determined right and wrong in the Garden of Eden is still the same today in harmony with the Ten Commandments, the principles of which have existed from eternity in the past, and will exist through all future eternity. Ellen White corroborates this in the first three sentences of the book, Patriarchs and Prophets, 21, “ ‘God is love.’ I John 4:16. His nature, His law, is love. It ever has been; it ever will be.”

When the moral law was transgressed, another law was added because of the transgression. This law can properly be called the ceremonial law, and included all laws that were added because of transgression. Sin is the transgression of law that is in force. Once the ceremonial law was added, it became sinful to transgress this law. For example, under the ceremonial law it was a sin for Moses not to have his male children circumcised, and he could not take the children of Israel out of Egypt before this was accomplished. (See Exodus 4:24–26.)

In Galatians 3:19 Paul shows the reason for the ceremonial law and when it came into being after transgression. He also shows the time limit of this law, clearly demonstrating its temporary nature, which only lasted until the seed should come to whom the promise had been made. (Genesis 3:15.) He had already explained that the seed was Christ (Galatians 3:16).

From Galatians 3:19 we understand (1) the purpose of the ceremonial law, (2) when it came into existence, (3) the intelligences that ordained it which are different than the moral law, and (4) the fact that it was a law that would only exist for a temporary time—until Christ should come.

Editor’s Letter – The Law of Moses, Part III

Adventists believe that Ellen White was not only a prophet, but more than a prophet. Except for Jesus Christ there have only been three times in the history of the world, that we know of, that God has sent to His people a messenger who was more than a prophet. The first time was Moses. See Numbers 12. The second time was John the Baptist. See Matthew 11:9. The third time was when God sent a special messenger, to help His people prepare for the second coming of Christ. He sent Ellen G. White who said: “My work includes much more than the word ‘prophet’ signifies.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 32. Either she must be much more than a prophet, or a fraud.

Ellen White was given instruction that would enable God’s people to go all the way to the Holy City—all the way to the coming of Christ. Anything that is essential for us to know from the Bible to be ready for Jesus to come will be found, discussed or explained in her writings. “Your testimony is of a different character. It is to come down to the minutiae of life.” Testimonies, vol. 2, 608. So certainly something as important as whether or not we should keep the ceremonial law, or any part of it, would be pointed out. Following are a few of her statements on the ceremonial law:

“The ordinances which God Himself had appointed were made the means of blinding the mind and hardening the heart. God could do no more for man through these channels. The whole system must be swept away.” The Desire of Ages, 36.

“The great Teacher’s wisdom in limiting the measure of our researches in earthly directions, called the attention of all to his legislation from the very foundation of our world—to a code of morals, pure, simple, and practical, unencumbered by the long years of types and sacrifices, which passed away when the only true Sacrifice, Jesus, the only begotten Son of God, was offered for the sins of the world. . . . These lessons discharge his followers from the bondage of the ceremonial law.” The Review and Herald, June 21, 1898.

“In this ordinance, Christ discharged his disciples from the cares and burdens of the ancient Jewish obligations in rites and ceremonies. These no longer possessed any virtue.” Ibid., June 14, 1898.

“It was Christ’s desire to leave to his disciples an ordinance that would do for them the very thing they needed—that would serve to disentangle them from the rites and ceremonies which they had hitherto engaged in as essential, and which the reception of the gospel made no longer of any force. To continue these rites would be an insult to Jehovah.” Ibid.

Editorial – The Law of Moses, Part IV

There are many Christians today who believe in keeping various of the ceremonial law or Law of Moses. Some of them do not make a distinction in their minds between the ceremonial law or Law of Moses and the Ten Commandments, but the Bible makes a clear distinction between them. For example: (1)The Moral Law or Ten Commandments was spoken to the people by God’s own voice, and after Moses reviewed this law of Ten Commandments with the children of Israel (Deuteronomy 5:6–21) he stated that God “added no more” (Deuteronomy 5:22). The principles of the Ten Commandments were explained more fully to Moses and he wrote down these explanations for the people; e.g. see Leviticus 18 and 20 for a fuller description of the seventh commandment and Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 for a fuller description of the sixth commandment. All of the other commandments were also explained more completely by Moses. But, in addition to this, the Lord also gave His people ceremonial laws governing religious rituals. These ceremonial laws are very instructive because we find there an accurate picture of the plan of salvation and what is necessary for a man to do to be saved. These ceremonial laws were symbolic for the time of the Old Covenant (Hebrews 9:9) and included, (1) the daily service of the sanctuary with all that it involved—animal sacrifices, a priest who at that time was Aaron or one of his descendants, and (2) a yearly service of the earthly sanctuary (Hebrews 9:6–8) with all that this service involved and (3) ceremonies involving “foods and drinks, various washings and ordinances” pertaining to the body or the flesh (Hebrews 9:10). Then Paul states that these things were “imposed until the time of reformation.” When was the time of reformation? When the seed came (Galatians 3:19), when the Old Covenant would be superceded by the New Covenant (see Matthew 26:26–29), when the earthly sanctuary would be superceded by the heavenly sanctuary (Hebrews 9:11–15).

In the New Covenant we do not keep the types but rather the New Covenant ceremonies instead—the Old Covenant has passed away. The New Covenant ceremonies are three: (1) the ceremony of baptism which takes the place of circumcision; (2) the ceremony of humility or footwashing service (John 13) which takes the place of all the washings and purification ceremonies of the Old Covenant; and (3) the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper which takes the place of the Passover. Paul is very clear that Christians are not to keep the typical or ceremonial laws anymore; notice especially Hebrews 9:10; Galatians 3:19; Ephesians 2:14–18; Galatians 4:9, 10; Galatians 4:21–31; Galatians 5:1–6; Galatians 6:12–15.

Editorial – Impossible Ordinances

Concerning the ordinances mentioned in Colossians 2:14–23, which Paul says not to touch, taste or finger (handle), he continues by saying that these things have indeed a reputation of having wisdom in self-imposed worship and humility and in unsparing abuse of the body not having any value to protect against overindulgence of the flesh. (See verse 23.) In his epistles, Paul accuses those who desire to teach Christians to keep the ceremonial law of doing so for the satisfaction of the flesh. For example: “As many as desire to look good in the flesh, these compel you to be circumcised, only that they be not persecuted for the cross of Christ. For not even those having been circumcised themselves keep the law, but they desire you to be circumcised so that in your flesh they may boast.” Galatians 6:12, 13. [Literal translation.]

What is it about keeping the ceremonial law that involves unsparing abuse of the body, self-imposed worship, and, furthermore, allows a person then to boast in his flesh? In the time of the apostles, the Jews and those Christians who attempted to keep the ceremonial law did not keep it only in the manner as prescribed by Moses, but also as taught by the Jewish scribes and doctors. Concerning this, one writer describes it as follows: “Feasts, rituals, sacrifices, pilgrimages, tithes, Sabbaths, and fasts—these were all alike but expressions of the profound determination to keep God’s law as expounded in the synagogue. … For scrupulosity, unhesitating logic, conscientiousness as regards the moral aspect of every act of life it stands unparalleled. … Pharisaism laid upon the people burdens impossible to be borne. The rabbis’ insistence upon tithes and other religious charges must have been burdensome in the extreme, but even more deadening must have been their insistence that righteousness was impossible except through an unbroken observance of the Mosaic and the Moral Law; for who among the people could hope to master the accumulation of rabbinical teaching? In proportion as legalism grew, did the old prophetic teaching retreat, and life became less a direct service of a loving Jehovah and an ever increasingly fettered and hopeless succession of impossible tasks.” (A History of New Testament Times in Palestine, Shailer Mathews, A.M., D.D., New York, The MacMillan Company, 1914, 176–178.)

The abuse of the body and self-imposed worship involved, first, all rules by which eating or drinking or traveling or even acts of mercy and kindness were forbidden or restricted because of either the seventh day Sabbath, or ceremonial sabbaths, feast days, or certain weeks, months, or years. Second, the person who was successful in doing all these things (like Saul of Tarsus) could look down on others who did not succeed in the rigor of the system and could glory in their superior righteousness, which righteousness Paul said was rubbish (Philippians 3:8).

Bible Study Guides – Two Laws

July 29, 2012 – August 4, 2012

The People of the Ark

Key Text

“Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.” Galatians 3:24.

Study Help: Patriarchs and Prophets, 363–373.

Introduction

“[Galatians 3:24 quoted.] … The Holy Spirit through the apostle [Paul] is speaking especially of the moral law. The law reveals sin to us, and causes us to feel our need of Christ and to flee unto Him for pardon and peace by exercising repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 234.

1 THE ETERNAL MORAL LAW

  • What was one of the purposes for which Jesus came into the world? From what does He save us? Matthew 1:21. How can we recognize sin in our life? Romans 3:20; 7:7, 12; Psalm 19:7.

Note: “It was because the law was changeless, because man could be saved only through obedience to its precepts, that Jesus was lifted up on the cross.” The Desire of Ages, 763.

“By His [Christ’s] perfect obedience He has made it possible for every human being to obey God’s commandments.” Christ’s Object Lessons, 312.

“Without the law, men have no just conception of the purity and holiness of God or of their own guilt and uncleanness. They have no true conviction of sin and feel no need of repentance.” The Great Controversy, 468.

  • How did Christ relate to the moral law? Isaiah 42:21; Matthew 5:17–20, 27, 28; Luke 16:17, 18. What did Paul write about the moral law? Romans 2:12, 13, 17, 21–27; 3:31; 8:7.

Note: “Satan is seeking to destroy the force of the Ten Commandments, urging his agents to declare that Christ nailed them to His cross. The cross is an immutable argument of the unchangeable character of the law of God. Christ died in order that a way might be provided for saving the sinner, in meeting the demands of the broken law.” The Signs of the Times, March 12, 1896.

2 WHICH IS WHICH?

  • Which law is called “a schoolmaster,” and why? Galatians 3:24.

Note: “When the mind is drawn to the cross of Calvary, Christ by imperfect sight is discerned on the shameful cross. Why did He die? In consequence of sin. What is sin? The transgression of the law. Then the eyes are open to see the character of sin. The law is broken but cannot pardon the transgressor. It is our schoolmaster, condemning to punishment. Where is the remedy? The law drives us to Christ, who was hanged upon the cross that He might be able to impart His righteousness to fallen, sinful man.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 341.

“What law is the schoolmaster to bring us to Christ? I answer: Both the ceremonial and the moral code of ten commandments.

“Christ was the foundation of the whole Jewish economy. The death of Abel was in consequence of Cain’s refusing to accept God’s plan in the school of obedience to be saved by the blood of Jesus Christ typified by the sacrificial offerings pointing to Christ. Cain refused the shedding of blood which symbolized the blood of Christ to be shed for the world. This whole ceremony was prepared by God, and Christ became the foundation of the whole system. This is the beginning of its work as the schoolmaster to bring sinful human agents to a consideration of Christ the Foundation of the whole Jewish economy.

“All who did service in connection with the sanctuary were being educated constantly in regard to the intervention of Christ in behalf of the human race. This service was designed to create in every heart a love for the law of God, which is the law of His kingdom. The sacrificial offering was to be an object lesson of the love of God revealed in Christ—in the suffering, dying victim, who took upon Himself the sin of which man was guilty, the innocent being made sin for us.” Ibid., 233.

  • What does the Bible say about the ceremonial law? Ephesians 2:15; Colossians 2:14; Hebrews 10:1.

Note: “The ceremonial law was to answer a particular purpose in Christ’s plan for the salvation of the race. The typical system of sacrifices and offerings was established that through these services the sinner might discern the great offering, Christ.” The Faith I Live By, 106.

3 SHADOWS OF THINGS TO COME

  • Why did the ceremonial law—the shadow of future things—come to an end? Colossians 2:16, 17, 20; Hebrews 10:4; 9:11, 12, 15.

Note: “There are many who try to blend these two [legal] systems, using the texts that speak of the ceremonial law to prove that the moral law has been abolished; but this is a perversion of the Scriptures. The distinction between the two systems is broad and clear. The ceremonial system was made up of symbols pointing to Christ, to His sacrifice and His priesthood. This ritual law, with its sacrifices and ordinances, was to be performed by the Hebrews until type met antitype in the death of Christ, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. Then all the sacrificial offerings were to cease. It is this law that Christ ‘took … out of the way, nailing it to His cross.’ Colossians 2:14.” Patriarchs and Prophets, 365.

“God’s people, whom He calls His peculiar treasure, were privileged with a two fold system of law; the moral and the ceremonial. The one, pointing back to creation to keep in remembrance the living God who made the world, whose claims are binding upon all men in every dispensation, and which will exist through all time and eternity. The other, given because of man’s transgression of the moral law, the obedience to which consisted in sacrifices and offerings pointing to the future redemption. Each is clear and distinct from the other.” “Ellen G. White Comments,” The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 6, 1094.

  • Who was among the first to offer an animal sacrifice, and what did this represent? Hebrews 11:4; John 1:29; Hebrews 9:28.

Note: “The typical service and the ceremonies connected with it were abolished at the cross. The great antitypical Lamb of God had become an offering for guilty man, and the shadow ceased in the substance.” “Ellen G. White Comments,” The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 6, 1061.

“Our Saviour, in His life and death, fulfilled all the prophecies pointing to Himself, and was the substance of all the types and shadows signified.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 231.

4 THE BLOOD OF CHRIST IN SYMBOLS

  • Why were animal sacrifices required? Hebrews 9:22; 10:10–14.

Note: “In the plan of redemption there must be the shedding of blood, for death must come in consequence of man’s sin. The beasts for sacrificial offerings were to prefigure Christ. In the slain victim, man was to see the fulfillment for the time being of God’s word, ‘Ye shall surely die’ [Genesis 2:17]. And the flowing of the blood from the victim would also signify an atonement.” The Review and Herald, March 3, 1874.

“The sacrificial offerings were ordained by God to be to man a perpetual reminder and a penitential acknowledgment of his sin and a confession of his faith in the promised Redeemer. They were intended to impress upon the fallen race the solemn truth that it was sin that caused death.” Patriarchs and Prophets, 68.

  • After the children of Israel had suffered under bondage in Egypt, what special service was introduced to be more specific in the representation of Jesus Christ? Leviticus 23:5; I Corinthians 5:7, 8.

Note: “It was Christ’s desire to leave to His disciples an ordinance that would do for them the very thing they needed—that would serve to disentangle them from the rites and ceremonies which they had hitherto engaged in as essential, and which the reception of the gospel made no longer of any force. To continue these rites would be an insult to Jehovah.” “Ellen G. White Comments,” The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 5, 1139, 1140.

“He [Christ] kept the moral law, and exalted it by answering its claims as man’s representative. Those of Israel who turned to the Lord, and accepted Christ as the reality shadowed forth by the typical sacrifices, discerned the end of that which was to be abolished.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 231.

  • What was the blood of animals unable to accomplish? Hebrews 7:19; 10:4. How only is complete cleansing obtained? Acts 4:12.

5 DONE AWAY

  • On many occasions in the history of the Jewish nation, what was so very difficult for them to understand? Isaiah 1:11–15. Why? Isaiah 1:6. What did the early Christians therefore understand?

Note: “The Jews had prided themselves upon their divinely appointed services; and they concluded that as God once specified the Hebrew manner of worship, it was impossible that He should ever authorize a change in any of its specifications. They decided that Christianity must connect itself with the Jewish laws and ceremonies. They were slow to discern to the end of that which had been abolished by the death of Christ, and to perceive that all their sacrificial offerings had but prefigured the death of the Son of God, in which type had met its antitype rendering valueless the divinely appointed ceremonies and sacrifices of the Jewish religion. …

“He [Paul] knew that the typical ceremonies must soon altogether cease, since that which they had shadowed forth had come to pass, and the light of the gospel was shedding its glory upon the Jewish religion, giving a new significance to its ancient rites.” Sketches from the Life of Paul, 64, 65.

“[In Acts 15:13–29]. It was his [the apostle James’] sentence that the ceremonial law, and especially the ordinance of circumcision, be not in any wise urged upon the Gentiles, or even recommended to them.” Ibid., 69.

  • While the Jews used the sacrificial system as a license to sin, what type of sacrifices was God really seeking? Psalm 51:17–19; Isaiah 1:16–18.

Note: “Paul did not bind himself nor his converts to the ceremonies and customs of the Jews, with their varied forms, types, and sacrifices; for he recognized that the perfect and final offering had been made in the death of the Son of God. The age of clearer light and knowledge had now come. And although the early education of Paul had blinded his eyes to this light, and led him to bitterly oppose the work of God, yet the revelation of Christ to him while on his way to Damascus had changed the whole current of his life. His character and works had now become a remarkable illustration of those of his divine Lord. His teaching led the mind to a more active spiritual life, that carried the believer above mere ceremonies. …

“He preached the cross of Christ.” Sketches from the Life of Paul, 105.

REVIEW AND THOUGHT QUESTIONS

1 Why do we need to have a clear understanding of the principles of the Ten Commandments?

2 Why did the death of Christ make the entire ceremonial law no longer valid?

3 What are we actually doing if we continue to keep the ceremonial law—including the Passover—after the crucifixion?

4 Whose blood do we need in order to have actual cleansing from sin?

5 Because there are statutes directly connected to the ceremonial law, as well as to the moral law, which ones are we to study and implement today?

Extra Reading

“The Jews had become familiar with the offering of blood, and had almost lost sight of the fact that it was sin which made necessary all this shedding of the blood of beasts. They did not discern that it prefigured the blood of God’s dear Son, which was to be shed for the life of the world.” The Desire of Ages, 589, 590.

“The moral law was never a type or a shadow. It existed before man’s creation, and will endure as long as God’s throne remains. God could not change nor alter one precept of His law in order to save man; for the law is the foundation of His government. It is unchangeable, unalterable, infinite, and eternal. In order for man to be saved, and for the honor of the law to be maintained, it was necessary for the Son of God to offer Himself as a sacrifice for sin. He who knew no sin became sin for us. He died for us on Calvary. His death shows the wonderful love of God for man, and the immutability of His law.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 239, 240.

“The Sabbath commandment was not nailed to the cross. If it was, the other nine commandments were; and we are at liberty to break them all, as well as to break the fourth. I saw that God had not changed the Sabbath, for He never changes.” Early Writings, 33.

“After Christ died on the cross as a sin offering, the ceremonial law could have no force. Yet it was connected with the moral law, and was glorious. The whole bore the stamp of divinity, and expressed the holiness, justice, and righteousness of God. And if the ministration of the dispensation to be done away was glorious, how much more must the reality be glorious, when Christ was revealed, giving His life-giving sanctifying Spirit to all who believe?” Lift Him Up, 147.

© 2005 Reformation Herald Publishing Association, Roanoke, Virginia. Reprinted by permission.

Evidence Against Unbelief

When crisis develops among God’s people, sometimes it is necessary to talk about things that we would not otherwise discuss.

Let us begin with a statement from The Desire of Ages, 458. It says, “God does not compel men to give up their unbelief. Before them are light and darkness, truth and error. It is for them to decide which they will accept. The human mind is endowed with power to discriminate between right and wrong. God designs that men shall not decide from impulse, but from the weight of evidence, carefully comparing scripture with scripture.”

The fact that a decision must be made based on the weight of evidence means there is evidence to be considered on both sides of the argument. This also implies that you do not know everything. Because God does know everything, He does not need to make a decision based on the weight of evidence. The apostle Paul said, “We know in part, and we prophesy in part.” I Corinthians 13:9, NKJV.

In weighing the evidence, for what should we look? We are told in The Great Controversy, 595, that, “God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms. The opinions of learned men, the deductions of science, the creeds or decisions of ecclesiastical councils [all church councils], as numerous and discordant as are the churches which they represent, the voice of the majority—not one nor all of these should be regarded as evidence for or against any point of religious faith. Before accepting any doctrine or precept, we should demand a plain ‘Thus saith the Lord’ in its support.”

It is very important to know what the word of God actually teaches and commands. Those who do not understand this principle can get misled on subjects, for example, the state of the dead.

We are living in interesting times. Ellen White said that the time would come when every wind of doctrine would be blowing. I cannot help but wonder if we are not living in that time now. There are many deceptive doctrines floating around today, and our only safety is to stand on the word of God.

There is a Scripture that has been confusing to many Seventh-day Adventists. It is something that we need to understand because we are facing a soon-coming Sunday law crisis, not just in the United States but worldwide, and this passage will be used against all Seventh-day Adventists. For this reason it needs to be understood. Many theologians who have written books believe that the Christian Sabbath has been changed to Sunday, and the passage of Scripture that we are going to study is one of their main proof texts.

To understand this text, attention must be given to the antecedents of the pronouns that are used. Many people get in trouble while reading their Bibles because of the use of pronouns. The apostle Paul is an expert at this, and careful attention must be given to what the pronoun refers or we can draw all kinds of conclusions to the text. We are going to look at the antecedent of the pronoun.

Reading Colossians 2:14 from the Greek New Testament, Paul talks about “wiping away the handwriting of the ordinances which was against us, which was contrary to us. And He took it out of the midst (out of the way), nailing it to the cross. And having stripped the rulers and the authorities, He made a display of them in public, boldly triumphing over them in Himself.”

Immediately you should know that the apostle Paul is not referring to the Ten Commandments here, as they were not handwritten. Moses, the prophets and the apostles all wrote by hand. The Bible is inspired, and handwritten, but the Ten Commandments were not handwritten.

It is recorded only three times in the Bible where God wrote something. Every time it says explicitly how He wrote—with His finger. One time He wrote in stone (Exodus 31:18). One time He wrote on a wall (Daniel 5:5), and one time He wrote on the ground (John 8:6). God doesn’t use handwriting; He writes with His finger.

Some may argue that your finger is on your hand, but your finger is not your hand. My late brother, while a teenager living on a farm, was involved in a tractor accident. His little finger was cut in such a way that it was just hanging by the skin. Though he was rushed to the hospital and underwent surgery to sew the finger back on and reattach the nerves, it had been too long since it was cut off, and the next day that finger was dead. So, he had to go to surgery again to have it cut off. Though my brother lost the end of that finger, he didn’t lose his hand. Your hand and your fingers are two different things.

Whatever the ordinance in Colossians 2:14 is referring to, it has been wiped away. The term wipe away means to be abolished, not existent anymore. Not only that, these are called ordinances which could also be translated as decrees. These ordinances, Paul says, were against us, contrary to us, and they were taken out of the midst. In other words, they were removed. They were nailed to the cross.

Are there ordinances that were nailed to the cross? Yes, that is what this Scripture says. These ordinances, Paul says, were against us, they were taken out of the midst, and they were blotted out or abolished. Because of this, the apostle Paul now is going to draw some conclusions. Notice what he says in verse 16: “Therefore [because of what I’ve told you already, this is the conclusion], do not let anyone judge you in food or in drink, or concerning a feast or a new moon or of sabbath days.”

Our Protestant friends get in trouble because they stop right there. We can get into trouble with documents if we just read to the middle of the sentence. Paul has mentioned five things: eating, drinking, feasts, new moons, and sabbaths, but that is just the first part of the sentence. The next part of the sentence, “which are shadows of things to come,” follows in verse 17. He is not condemning eating or drinking or feasts or new moons or sabbaths. What he is saying is, “Don’t let anybody judge you concerning these things which are shadows of things to come, but the body of Christ.” It could be translated, “but the body is of Christ.”

Let us stop there before we continue. In the Old Testament there were ordinances that had to do with eating. At certain times of the year it was forbidden to eat leavened bread. There were even food offerings. Paul told the Colossians not to let anybody judge them in regard to these things with eating, which were a shadow of things to come.

There were also ordinances in the Old Testament in regard to drinking and also feast days. (See Leviticus 23.) Some of these feast days were called sabbaths. There were also ordinances in regard to new moons. Paul says, “Don’t let anybody judge you in regard to these things which are a shadow of things to come.”

He continues, “Let no one pass judgment on you, wishing in humility and worshiping of angels which he has seen.” Verse 18. However, some manuscripts say, “worshiping of angels which he has not seen, pushing in vain, puffed up by his fleshly mind and not holding the Head from whom all the body through the joints and bands having been supplied and having been fitted together will grow with the growth of God. If then you died with Christ from the fundamental principles of the world, why, as living in the world, are you under ordinances?” Verses 18–20.

That’s a serious question. Christ was the fulfilling of these things. Paul is talking about the ordinances he has just mentioned, the ordinances that have to do with eating, drinking, feast days, new moons, and sabbath days which are a shadow of things to come. Then he makes a really strong statement. Do you remember back in the Garden of Eden what God told Adam and Eve about the forbidden fruit? I want to tell you, most Adventists have not come to grips with what we are going to read now in the Bible from verse 21. This is strong. I didn’t write it, but this is how it reads in the literal translation; “Do not touch, do not taste, do not finger.” In other words don’t even touch it with your fingertips. Some translations say: “Do not handle. Do not touch it. Do not taste it. Do not even put your finger on it, which things are all unto corruption in the using according to the injunctions and teachings of men.” Verses 21, 22.

In verse 23, the phrase “which things” is used. What are these things? Well, they are the ordinances that have been nailed to the cross. Paul says, “Don’t touch these things. Don’t taste them. Don’t even put your finger on it. They have a reputation, indeed of wisdom, in self-imposed worship.”

You see, when God hasn’t commanded something and you do it anyway, that is not of God; it is not divinely directed worship; it is self-imposed worship. “Which things have a reputation, indeed of wisdom, and self-imposed worship, in humility, and severe treatment of the body, not in any honor, but for the satisfaction of the flesh.” Verse 23.

These ordinances, that God gave to His people in the Old Testament, had been covered up with a mass of human tradition which made it almost impossible even for the Jews to keep. And then, there were teachers trying to get the Christians to keep all this tradition that the Jews had come up with over several hundred years since the captivity. Paul says not to have anything to do with it for it is man-made.

Many people confuse the moral law with the ceremonial law and use the same argument used by the Roman Catholic Church in their objection to Protestantism. Paul said, “Therefore, brothers, stand and hold the traditions which you have been taught, whether through word or letter from us.” II Thessalonians 2:15.

The Roman Catholic Church believes there are two kinds of tradition—verbal and written. They believe that the oral tradition they have that was handed down from the apostles is even more important than the written tradition—the New Testament. There are Adventists today using this same argument, insisting that the feast days should still be kept; however, decisions cannot be based on apostolic tradition but on a “thus saith the Lord.”

Adventists sometimes have done the same thing with Ellen White. I have received material that asks, Did you know that Ellen White, at a certain date, drank some cocoa? The tradition of Ellen White is not the standard of what to believe or how to eat. I look to the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy to find those instructions.

I once read an account of a pope back in the Middle Ages, the Dark Ages. He had fathered a child by adultery and attempted to justify himself by claiming he was not more holy than David or Solomon who both made many mistakes and still wrote part of the Old Testament.

There are other texts that people misinterpret. Paul, giving a defense before a judge, said, “And they neither found me in the temple disputing with anyone nor inciting the crowd, either in the synagogues or in the city. Nor can they prove the things of which they now accuse me. But this I confess to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, so I worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets.” Acts 24:12–14, NKJV. Those advocating keeping of the feasts believe that because the ordinances of feasts were written “in the law and in the prophets,” Paul still kept them. Paul understood what those ordinances pointed forward to, and he kept the ordinances in the antitype, not the type, because Christ had already died on the cross.

Every single one of the feasts has an antitype.

The Passover—This was the first feast of the year. The antitype of the Passover is found in I Corinthians 5, and this is one of the principle passages about which people are really confused. This is the story of a man who was living with his father’s wife. Though Paul was absent, he told them he was there in spirit and very clearly said that the man needed to be disfellowshiped because of his open sin. (See I Corinthians 5:1–5.) In this context he said, “Your glorying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump?” The little leaven—this man’s sin in living with his father’s wife—would affect the whole lump, the whole church, so he must be removed. “Therefore purge out the old leaven [disfellowship this person] that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened.” A church that is unleavened is a church that does not allow a member to be living in open sin and remain a member of that church. “For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast.” Verses 6–8, NKJV. Taken out of context, some believe this to mean that we are supposed to keep the feast days.

In The Desire of Ages, 652, when Christ instituted the Lord’s Supper, Ellen White wrote: “Christ was standing at the point of transition between two economies and their two great festivals. [One was the Passover and one was the Lord’s Supper.] He, the spotless Lamb of God, was about to present Himself as a sin offering, that He would thus bring to an end the system of types and ceremonies that for four thousand years had pointed to His death. As He ate the Passover with His disciples, He instituted in its place the service that was to be the memorial of His great sacrifice. The national festival of the Jews was to pass away forever. The service which Christ established was to be observed by His followers in all lands and through all ages.”

Paul speaks of the Lord’s Supper when he says that Christ is our sacrifice. “Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.” Verse 8, NKJV.

“When he had come, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood about and laid many serious complaints against Paul which they could not prove, while he answered for himself, ‘Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended in anything at all.’ ” Acts 25:7, 8, NKJV. This is claimed as further proof that Paul continued to keep the feasts; however, it is not a clear “thus saith the Lord” and stretches the meaning of the verse like all other passages brought forth in this instance. The apostle Paul well understood what those feast days represented. The Passover represented the sacrifice on the cross.

The Feast of Weeks or Pentecost—This represented the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on God’s children that would occur 50 days after the first.

The Feast of Trumpets—This represented the prediction of prophecy of the worldwide awakening concerning the Second Advent movement that happened in the later part of the eighteenth and early part of the nineteenth centuries.

The Day of Atonement—We believe in keeping this festival in the antitype. We are at present living in the real Day of Atonement. A careful study of the Bible will reveal that we do not get involved in any other feast while in the Day of Atonement. The literal translation from the Greek New Testament of these texts says, “Neither in the law of the Jews, neither unto the temple or Caesar have I sinned anything at all.”

Sin is the transgression of the law—the Ten Commandments. If it was sin to break the ceremonial law, even Jesus Christ would have been a sinner, because in both the gospel and in the book The Desire of Ages He did not keep every aspect or specification of the ceremonial law at all times. For example, Jesus touched a leper, which was not in accordance with the ceremonial law that declared the leper unclean. (See Matthew 8:2, 3; Mark 1:40, 41.)

Another argument in favor of the feasts is Acts 28:17, NKJV, which says, “It came to pass after three days that Paul called the leaders of the Jews together. So when they had come together, he said to them: ‘Men and brethren, though I have done nothing against our people or the customs of our fathers, yet I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans.’ ”

Paul did not lie here if he did not keep the ceremonial law because he did continue to keep those ceremonies, but in the antitype. In Acts 18:21, it does read that Paul kept the ceremonial feast in Jerusalem. However, when I looked up that verse in my Greek New Testament, I was shocked to find the evidence is just not there. The footnote in the Greek New Testament reads that this statement didn’t even appear in any of the ancient manuscripts and is absent from several of the oldest translations.

Another so-called proof text is found in Acts 20:16 where Paul hurried to be in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost. To be there was not a command to keep the feast. What if I said to somebody that I want to be in Atlanta for Thanksgiving? Is that a command to keep Thanksgiving as a holy day? Not at all. The Jewish Christians had planned the whole year around these different ceremonial feasts. Time was measured by them, and they would talk about before or after Passover, before or after the Feast of Trumpets, before or after the Atonement. The apostles could use that language and say they would be in such a place by this time. It certainly is not a command to keep these feast days as they were kept prior to their fulfillment at the cross of Calvary.

There are some who say they have evidence from the early Christian literature that the twelve apostles, not Paul but the others, kept the ceremonial law. In the book, Sketches from the Life of Paul by Ellen G. White, she says very clearly that among the Christians, the apostle Paul was thought to be a teacher of dangerous doctrines. She makes it very clear in that book, and also in The Acts of the Apostles, 199, that the apostle Paul had to stand alone amongst even the apostles.

The apostles of Jesus were very slow to understand the significance of what had happened when Jesus was crucified and, as such had fulfilled the ceremonial law, making it no longer in effect. There were many of the apostles that probably continued to keep the entire ceremonial law for the rest of their lives, which was a mistake on their part. Do you want to rest your faith on a mistake that somebody else made?

Ellen White says that the apostle Paul so desired to bring harmony and unity into the Christian church that at the end of his life he made a mistake. It is recorded in Acts 21:20–24 NKJV: “And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, ‘You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law [ceremonial law]; but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come. Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow. Take them and be purified with them.’ ” In other words, show respect for the ceremonial law so we can have peace. The apostle Paul did what the apostles suggested, and it was the reason he was taken prisoner, cutting short his ministry.

Ellen White says definitely over and over again that it was a mistake. Do you want to base your religion on a mistake that Paul made or on a mistake that the apostles made?

The apostles were human just like us, and they made mistakes. I would never make a decision whether or not to drink cocoa on the basis that Ellen White at one time was seen to drink a cup of cocoa, would you? That is a dangerous way to make a decision. The answer to the question is, “What does God say in His Inspired word?” That should be the only basis for decisions.

“The very priests who ministered in the temple had lost sight of the significance of the service they performed. They had ceased to look beyond the symbol to the thing signified. In presenting the sacrificial offerings they were as actors in a play. The ordinances which God Himself had appointed were made the means of blinding the mind and hardening the heart. God could do no more for man through these channels. The whole system must be swept away.” The Desire of Ages, 36. This subject here is made clear in very strong language.

(Unless appearing in quoted references or otherwise identified, Bible texts quoted are literal translation.)

Pastor John J. Grosboll is Director of Steps to Life and pastors the Prairie Meadows Free Seventh-day Adventist Church in Wichita, Kansas. He may be contacted by email at: historic@stepstolife.org, or by telephone at: 316-788-5559.