cjohns50 - 22 April 2009 10:16 AM

I guess this is a little late from the dates I see on this discussion but would like to put my two cents if no one minds. I don’t know exactly how to say this but say I go to church on Sunday and I read in the Bible about the Sabbath being the 7th day. What can it hurt to do what the Bible says? If when I am judged and come to find out it was an important part of being saved, I’m good . If it ends up not mattering what day you keep I’m still good. Win, win situation.
Also a misquote I noticed in the article was Colossian 2: 16 The article said sabbath but the Bible says sabbaths. From what I have studied sabbaths were annual celebration’s or feast days during the year not the weekly Sabbath. One word or letter can make a lot of difference.
Another thing that was disturbing was saying Adventist worship the day not God. I find that hard to believe and I don’t think that is a very Christ like thing to say. We should have respect for all our brothers and sisters no matter their religious beliefs. God loves us all and he says He has sheep in other folds. Which I assume He means other religions.

Respectfully Carol

The command wasn’t that they were suposed to go to church on Sabbath but that they were not suppose to work and to stay home, them,there animals, there man servent or there maidservent.... it isn’t about a day of worship but about a physical rest to remind them that He delevered them out of Eygpt where there slaves where they did physical work. There worship happened at the temple when sacraficing .
Deut 5:15
15 Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the Lord your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the Lord your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day.

Now I love the word of God and I know that there are wonderful teachings for the born again believer when studying the old testament and the Law of Moses like circumcision and the feasts and the sacrifices and the food restrictions and the entire Sabatical system they all have enormous Spiritual meaning for us now, although to go back and keep them would be like an affence to Christ when he is the fulfilment of all the shadows of the old covenant… Gal 4:8-11
9 But now that you know God — or rather are known by God — how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? 10 You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! 11 I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.
Notice the all inclusive manner he lists the Sabbatical system...10 You are observing special days and months and seasons and years!
So here is the question when did you enter into His rest? When did you lay your burden of sin down? When did He give you rest and forgive you of your debt? Does he carry all your burdens? When did he deliver you from slavery from sin. And if He has done all those things for you how should you remember how he gave you rest? My answer is by not picking up the burden of doubt ,sin,greed,mallace

This is a must read in its context..

Col 2:13-23

13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross. 15 And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.
16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. 18 Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you for the prize. Such a person goes into great detail about what he has seen, and his unspiritual mind puffs him up with idle notions. 19 He has lost connection with the Head, from whom the whole body, supported and held together by its ligaments and sinews, grows as God causes it to grow.
20 Since you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world, why, as though you still belonged to it, do you submit to its rules: 21 “Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!”? 22 These are all destined to perish with use, because they are based on human commands and teachings. 23 Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their self-imposed worship, their false humility and their harsh treatment of the body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence.

Anyway the problem I see is that Adventists have another athority that they use with the bible and when the bible says the Sabbath is a shadow and the reality is found in Christ and EG White says the sabbath is the seal of God When the Holy Spirit is the seal. It is a different Gospel from another athority. Think about the ramifications of judging Christians by the sabbath (the shadow) when they have believed in Christ and bean born again and placed in his body by the indwelling Holly Spirit and are in Christ (the reality) ? It is judging there salvation that Christ gave them forget that you have bean forgiven and your name written it the book of live. If you are not a shadow keeper you will be lost. And that is what they do just look at there endtime prophecies about the mark of the beast and there being the remnent. I love Adventists, my dad is a paster and I have worked for adventists for 35 years and have gone to adventist schools and most of my Christian friends are adventists but when you mix the Bible with other books there is a problem. Also I am not against Sabbath keeping it is just not the test of obediance. Read Romans 14. Thanks for the reply and forgive my spelling my new email update doesn’t have a spellcheck. Dave

cjohns50 - 22 April 2009 06:10 PM

Bob,
Thanks for the references I will look them up. I do see the laws as 2 different sets of laws. One written on scrolls by Moses and one on stone by the finger of God and I do not believe the ones on stone were done away with. The way I read it the laws of Moses were fulfilled by Jesus, but I just can’t let go of the others ..Revelation 22:14 Blessed are those that do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city.
Carol

Hi Carol, I’d like to reiterate what BobJ said. The KJV translation of Revelation 22:14 is incorrect because it is based on a flawed Greek manuscript. This error has been corrected in more modern translations. Here is an explanatory note from the KJV Bible Commentary:

“The [KJV] has unhappily utilized a Greek text here that is faulty and teaches what the rest of the Bible denies, that is, salvation by keeping the commandments. Rather, salvation comes by symbolically washing their robes in the blood of the Lamb (cf. Revelation 7:14).”

Evidently the phrase “wash their robes” and “do his commandments” look almost identical in the Greek. The manuscript upon which the KJV is based unfortunately included this error.

Carol, please be careful when finding one verse that seems to contradict other parts of Scripture, particularly when you are reading the KJV. There have been many important manuscripts found since the KJV was produced that have clarified some of these problematic texts. This is a case where having another translation to check is very helpful. I personally recommend either the ESV or the NASB.

Here is the text in several different translations:

ESV:  Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates.

NASB: Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter by the gates into the city.

NIV: Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city.

NRSV: Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they will have the right to the tree of life and may enter the city by the gates.

By the way, thanks everyone for the kind tone of this discussion.

Greg

BobJ - 22 April 2009 06:32 PM

Hi Carol
I’m no Greek scholar, but I have an interlinear.  Here is the literal English interpretation of Revelation 22:14.  I write this as a friend.  This is not a challenge nor a debate.  Thes things are too important for that.  So I write this as your on-line friend.  Please accept it in the kindness with which I write.

I’ll write the words in the order as they appear:

Revelation 22:14
“Blessed are the ones washing the robes of them over the tree of life and by the gates they may enter into the city.”

The King James often mistranslates the word for “teachings” (entole) as “law” (nomos), but neither word is in this verse!  It led to a lot of confusion, and as an adventist I’d just quote verses like “if you love me keep my commandments” without realizing the mistranslation--and totally dirrerent meaning.  The 10 commandments are nowhere in sight! 

I was kind of stunned when I learned this!  I am sort of legalistic--it’s my default setting--so this mattered, until I realized the mistake.

I’m not anxious to get into this, but Jesus didn’t say that he didn’t come to change the law--he said that he didn’t come to destroy, but to fulfill.  The law was changed as Hebrews 7 says. 
I thought I’d never get rest over this issue!
Bob

Praise God we are saved by His blood. But he can not to destroy the law but to fulfill the legal aspect of it. However .... Which of the ten commandments would one want to do away with? Ahhh yes .... I know. Just the fourth.

GH,

You missed BobJ’s point. The whole law was fulfilled, not just the ten commandments. There are 603 other commandments outside of the decalogue which were also fulfilled by Jesus. “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” (Matthew 5:17) “Law and Prophets” encompasses much more than the decalogue, it includes the entirety of what had been revealed to the Israelites in their Bible, the Old Testament. Indeed, it all pointed to Jesus and found its fulfillment in him (John 5:39).

If you want to make the argument that we are picking and choosing which parts of the law we’d like to keep, you are obviously guilty of the same thing by choosing to ignore the God-given commandments governing the observance of holy days beyond the Sabbath.

Greg

Hi Carol,

Forgive me for not welcoming you to this forum. I was just trying to highlight some commonalities. At least, all saturday sabbatarians, sunday sabbatarians and non-sabbatarians have a special day, one day in seven in which they worship God. And the Christians at large are following the example of apostles and the earlier church by worshiping God on Lord’s Day, no matter why they consider it a day of rest or just a proper day for worship according to the examples found in New Testament.

But isn’t it just interesting how some Adventists are first asking us, formers, to respect other brother and sisters no matter of their religious beliefs and afterward they point to them as doing away with God’s commandments?

I ‘m pointing to GH behavior, who initially agreed with Carol’s words below.

cjohns50 - 22 April 2009 10:16 AM

Another thing that was disturbing was saying Adventist worship the day not God. I find that hard to believe and I don’t think that is a very Christ like thing to say. We should have respect for all our brothers and sisters no matter their religious beliefs.

But he could not keep himself for giving us an example of what “respect” means. Thanks, but no thanks.

Glorify Him - 23 April 2009 05:24 AM

Praise God we are saved by His blood. But he can not to destroy the law but to fulfill the legal aspect of it. However .... Which of the ten commandments would one want to do away with? Ahhh yes .... I know. Just the fourth.

Well, if this is how we are playing the game, you’re double standard doesn’t help you gain the respect you desire. It seems that the sabbath topic is a topic which both Adventists and formers like so much to talk about. I’m afraid this talk about who’s right about this issue is a BIG DISTRACTION from what is truly important, the gospel. The subject of atonement or the doctrines of grace does not stir the same interest that this subject stirs. Sad.

The problem is that the sabbath issue is a distraction fatal to the gospel in the Adventist schema of salvation. In contrast with the reformers who saw the gospel as the first and foremost sign of the true church, Adventist sees Saturday sabbath as the first and foremost sign of the true church. Something doesn’t smell right, isn’t it? Should not be the preaching of the pure gospel the most important thing?

Unfortunately in the Adventist schema Sabbath is tied to salvation to the degree that it not only obscures the gospel, it denies it. The true gospel affirms that in virtue of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection our sins are blotted at the moment when the Holy Spirit gives us faith in Christ’s blood, and from that moment there is no condemnation for Christians (Romans 8:3). They are justified apart from works, apart from anything they did or anything that happened in their life, but solely on account of Jesus’ works in their behalf.

In contrast, in the Adventist schema, somebody receives only pardon, a conditional forgiveness of their sins, not a blotting our of their sins at their conversion. They must live a holy life, convert to keeping the saturday sabbath, be faithful to keeping it in times of opposition, and at the end, their sins will be blotted out, and there will be no longer any condemnation for them. The sabbath plays an important role in this scheme which resembles the Romano Catholic gospel in which God justifies the godly, not the ungodly as Romans 4:5 tells us.

If Adventist want to keep the saturday sabbath out of gratitude for the justification and the blotting out of sins they already have, that’s fine. But as long as they claim to be saved by Chris’s blood but just temporarily and conditionally on their sanctification, believing that in the future they may be lost because their sins were not blotted out, accusing the other churches of doing away with the commandments, they forfeit the gospel of God in favor of sabbath keeping.

My message: keep the saturday sabbath if you want to, it’s a secondary subject, but get rid of the Investigative Judgment scheme and place justification and blotting out the sins where it belongs, at the beginning of the Christian life, not at the end. Cease splitting the atonement in two, pardon and blotting of sins, and stop making justification dependent on sanctification. God judging people and justifying them at the bar of the Investigative Judgment depending on how well they had progressed in sanctification is antithetical to the true justification which is apart from works, apart from anything we did or we ever do.  If God need our works to justify ourselves at the bar of judgment, justification is no longer apart from works. It’s based on works, no matter how people will try to evade this conclusion.

Not the sabbath itself obscures the gospel. The endtime Adventist schema with it’s Investigative Judgment obscures it.
Gabriel

Gabriel
I have a couple questions, I don’t know the Bible as well as I should and I am sure have not studied as much as the rest of you so feel somewhat inadequate here but it seems to me there has to be some standard by which it is decided who goes to heaven. What exactly is your take on this. I can’t think I can just do as I please and still get to heaven just because I love Jesus. I guess one of my faults is everything to me is either black or white there are no gray areas. I need structure and to know what is right or wrong. My Mother says I am my own worst taskmaster. Just like now I have a tobacco habit I can’t get rid of and I feel like I will go to hell for that because our bodies are the temple of God and I am doing things to that temple that I shouldn’t do. Just because I smoke doesn’t mean I don’t love the Lord. So what are the requirements? I realize you can’t be saved by works but there has to be some kind of standard.
I think Bob misunderstood me I don’t go to church on Sat. and Sun. I go on Sat. There are a lot of denominations that have services on that day. I was just saying if the day doesn’t matter then Sat. is as good as any other day and my bases are covered both ways.
Carol

cjohns50 - 23 April 2009 09:18 AM

Gabriel
I have a couple questions, I don’t know the Bible as well as I should and I am sure have not studied as much as the rest of you so feel somewhat inadequate here but it seems to me there has to be some standard by which it is decided who goes to heaven.

Carol,

Since you’re looking for clear answers, we can know for sure that as far as God’s holy standards are concerned, we failed and continually fail to meet them. Romans 3 and Romans 7 speak eloquently about this situation. This is why the decision who’s going to heaven cannot be based on our performance in meeting God’s standards. On another thread Stan started talking about the gospel of God’s election of us in Christ. As Rom. 9:16 tells us, it does not depend on our will, our decision to accept Christ, anything we do, but on God’s decision to chose us in Christ, and as a result, Christ died for us and we believe in Him, even our faith is God’s gift, we contribute nothing to our salvation. Christ’s perfect fulfillment of God’s standards is the decisive element. It’s done, it’s accomplished. Believe in Him, look at Him and you will be saved.

Gabriel

I like especially this gem from Heidelberg Catechism, Question 60

Q60:  How are you righteous before God?
A60:  Only by true faith in Jesus Christ:[1] that is, although my conscience accuses me, that I have grievously sinned against all the commandments of God, and have never kept any of them,[2] and am still prone always to all evil;[3] yet God, without any merit of mine,[4] of mere grace,[5] grants and imputes to me the perfect satisfaction,[6] righteousness and holiness of Christ,[7] as if I had never committed nor had any sins, and had myself accomplished all the obedience which Christ has fulfilled for me;[8] if only I accept such benefit with a believing heart.[9]

1.  Rom. 3:21-25; Gal. 2:16; Eph. 2:8-9; Phil. 3:9
2.  Rom. 3:9-10
3.  Rom. 7:23
4.  Titus 3:5
5.  Rom. 3:24; Eph. 2:8
6.  I John 2:2
7.  I John 2:1; Rom. 4:4-5; II Cor. 5:19
8.  II Cor. 5:21
9.  John 3:18; Rom. 3:28; 10:10

Wonderful, Christ’s merits make the biggest difference in the world.
Soli Deo Gloria
Gabriel

Greg and GH

For more than 150 years now some preachers have said that Sunday is the mark of the beast and those who break the old covenant Sabbath will be lost.  Many would dismiss this as harmless—even if it is not Biblical.  But Paul does not regard the matter of imposing old covenant commands on new believers lightly. 

Referring to the old covenant, Paul says “if I rebuild what has been torn down, I prove myself to be a transgressor.” Gal 2:18.  We are here warned not to rebuild the old covenant with its restrictions.  So as Christians we believe that new believers are not bound by any old covenant commands unless they are also given as part of the new covenant. 

Paul makes this quite clear in Galatians and in Romans 14.  The Jews also understood that the Law of Moses would never apply to Gentiles, or to the church, as Deut 4:7-8, Ps 147:19-20, Mal 4:4 show. 

Those who would teach these old covenant laws as obligations (as these preachers do when they link the seventh-day sabbath to salvation) are “putting God to the test” (Acts 15:10), something Jesus warned Satan about, too, using those very same words! 

Bob

A little more about the covenants might be helpful here.  As mentioned above, 2 Cor 3:7 identifies the ten commandments as part of the covenant that was written and engraved on stones and which was done away with now that we are “in Christ.” This has been replaced by the everlasting covenant, the new covenant, as Hebrews 13:20 describes.

Paul explains that it’s a case of all or none--that if we receive circumcision we are obligated to keep the entire law (Gal 5:2).  He is saying that if we keep any part of the old covenant law because it’s the law, we become a debtor to keep the whole law and are, as a result, fallen from grace.

Jesus poured out his blood for the new, or everlasting covenant.  Will we stand fast in our freedom as Christians?  Or will we put ourselves and others under the dominion of the old Sinai covenant, where we are required to keep every part of it perfectly, and where we are plainly told that we will not inherit (Gal 4:21-31)?

The real issue is what covenant do we keep?  By keeping old covenant laws, we voluntarily put ourselves under it!  Paul makes it clear that we place ourselves under the old covenant by keeping its laws, that Christ is therefore of no value to us! 

Paul isn’t just being poetic here.  It’s a serious warning.

I realize that this is hard to understand, but every single command of the new covenant is given clearly in the new testament.  Christians are not antinomian. 

In the words of Jesus “Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled” it is important to realize that “Israel” is referred to in the scriptures as “heaven and earth.” This is referring to the passing of Israel.  Jesus was telling them that until the old covenant came to the end, they were under it. 

Highlight and paste or just click on the link for an article that explains this in detail.  This is not an endorsement for everything in the article, but you get the idea.

Tentmaker.org/books/heavenandearth.htm

I write this kindly, in love.  I sincerely wish you well.
Bob

By keeping old covenant laws, we voluntarily put ourselves under it!  Paul makes it clear that we place ourselves under the old covenant by keeping its laws, that Christ is therefore of no value to us! 

Paul isn’t just being poetic here.  It’s a serious warning.

So ... to follow your logic .... if we commit to not killing our neighbor ... we are placing ourselves under the old covenant?

The curse of the law has been answered by the sacrifice of Jesus. But He came not to do away with the law ... rather he fulfilled and answered the curse of the law ... that we might live.

Gh

It is also a new covenant command. 

I think you ask in sincerity, and others are reading this, so please let me explain.  I grew up in Michigan, where it is illegal to break the speed limit.  I now live in a different state.  Breaking the speed limit is also illegal here.  But I keep the speed limit here not because it is a Michigan law, but because I am under a different law, the law of my state.  Michigan law, good as it is, doesn’t apply here.

I’m not attacking the sabbath here, but I think there is a lot of confusion around this issue.  If you wish to keep the sabbath do it unto the Lord, and do it perfectly, by the book, but I think Paul would still worry that he had labored in vain over us, etc.  I think it sends a signal to the Christian world that we really don’t get it.  And their suspicions are confirmed quite regularly, in the writings of Ellen and in the public preaching with which we are so well acquainted.

To clarify, I mentioned above that I ocasionally go to church on Saturday, but I do it at risk of sending a signal that I am “keeping” it for old covenant reasons.  I think it will always carry that baggage, and I do not like the idea of contributing to the spiritual confusion of others.

I think we are free to keep it if we wish, but I think it is absolutely wrong to link it to one’s salvation.  Paul’s warnings stand.

Bob

Does the same apply to the keeping of the law that requires us not to murder?

GH

I believe that we are justified without reference to works of the law.  Acts 13:38,39 makes this clear.

We are under the law of Christ.  His commands are throughout the new testament.

I’m not anxious to chase this with you because I’m not sure it will be to anyone’s benefit.

Bob

GH,

As a courtesy, I will reply a bit further. 

48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day.
49 For I did not speak of my own accord, but the Father who sent me commanded me what to say and how to say it.
50 I know that his command leads to eternal life. So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say. John 12:48-50 NIV

There are many prophecies about Christ in the Old Testament.  In Deut. 18, after telling the Israelites that a failed prophecy is the mark of a false prophet (yes, even one unconditional, unfulfilled prophecy makes the false prophet!), God says that when Christ would come he would put his words into the Savior’s mouth, and he would speak God’s commands.  Jesus affirmed this (John 12:48) when he said “that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day.  For I did not speak of my own accord, but the Father who sent me commanded me what to say and how to say it.”

At the transfiguration, God said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!  Matt 17:5 NIV Before this we were to hear the law and the prophets (represented by Moses and Elijah) but now the Father is telling us to listen to his Son.  The Father had given all things into his hands (John 3:35), so it makes sense that Jesus “taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law.” Matt 7:29 NIV

Jesus left no doubt that he placed his teachings above all those who had taught before him, even above the 10 commandments. “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ But I tell you . . . Matt 5:21,22 NIV Jesus made sure that his listeners understood that he had authority to change the Law of Moses, and did not hesitate to quote directly from the 10 commandments and then to trump them with his own commands.  “It was said . . . but I say.” It has been said, . . . but I say.” v27-32 This got Jesus into trouble with the Jewish leaders, and it is safe to say that there are religious leaders today who fail to understand the authority with which he spoke. 

Jesus is putting the authority of his commands, given to him by the Father, above that of the ten commandments and all the Old Testament.  He made it clear that the commandments of the old covenant law would be replaced with his own commands. 

This change in the law was foretold by the prophet Hosea (Hosea 2:11).  Colossians 2: 16 confirms Hosea’s prophecy.  In the great commission, Jesus clearly emphasized that it was his teachings which were to be carried to all the earth, not those of the old covenant, when he said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. . . go . . teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.  And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” See Matt 28:18-20

So when Jesus says, “If you love me, keep my commandments,” or if when he says “he that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.” (John 14, KJV), or when he says, if ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love” or “Ye are my friends, if you do whatsoever I command you” it is clear that Jesus is talking about his own commands, given him by the Father.

The book of Hebrews tell us that though in the past God spoke to the fathers by the prophets, he now, in these last days, has spoken to us by His Son.  The Lord Jesus Christ has the last word, so to speak.  Did Jesus ever command us to keep the seventh-day Sabbath?  Never.  Astonishingly, Ellen White quotes these verses, but removes the reference to the God’s Son, and inserts her own writings (the spirit of prophecy) in the place of Christ--the very definition of the word “antichrist!” This would seem a bit dangerous, eh? 

Luke says our Lord was taken up, “after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen.” Acts 1:2.  The commandments of our Lord were given through the Holy Spirit.  Paul, writing under the power of the Holy Spirit, identifies the gospel commandments like this:  “If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command.” The King James puts it:  “If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord” 1 Cor 14:37

This is a challenge to the cults that often would dismiss the writings of Paul!  Paul clearly states that all his writings are “the commandments of the Lord.” And he says, that those who are spiritual will acknowledge it.  In 1 Thess. 4:2 he says “For you know what instructions we gave you by the authority of the Lord Jesus” (NIV) and “For you know what commandments we gave you by the Lord Jesus.” (KJV) Peter says it, too, reminding his readers of both the words spoken by the prophets and also the “commandments of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour.” (KJV) And again, in 2 Peter 3:15,16 Peter refers to the writings of Paul as “Scriptures.”

John, (author of the books by his name and also of Revelation), refers clearly to these commands of Jesus.  These are often misunderstood by SDAs who assume that he must be talking about the 10 commandments.  I’ve read that John used the Greek word for commandments 28 times, and in not a single case does it refer to the 10 commandments.  In nearly every case, if not in all, it refers to the commandments of Jesus.  The word is ‘entole’ which means “teachings” but which the King James translates as “commandments.” The word for “law” is ‘nomos’—a different word with altogether different meaning.  The resulting confusion has caused well-meaning Adventists to assume that John is referring to the 10 commandment law--a misunderstanding based on the mistranslation that lies at the base of their teachings on the mark of the beast, the Sabbath, and the law. 

“And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: and he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.  And hereby do we know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.  He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.  1 John 2:1-4.  (KJV) “His commandments” means the teachings of Christ.  Moses is nowhere in sight! 

“And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight. And this is the commandment, that we should believe on the name of his son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.” (John 3:23 KJV) John is telling us what he means by “his commandments” --to believe on Christ, and to obey what he has commanded.  John is telling us (commanding us) to keep the commandments of Jesus, as Jesus commanded.  John is carefully defining for us what he means by these words “and this is the commandment . . .”

Since John uses this meaning consistently throughout all his writing, any other meaning is highly unlikely.  As an SDA, one of my favorite proof texts was “the commandments of God” in Revelation 14:12.  I was sure that this meant the Decalogue, and by inclusion, the seventh-day Sabbath.  Instead, it means the teachings and commands of the Lord Jesus Christ, which, as we’ve seen, were given to him by the Father.  “For out of Zion (not Sinai) shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.” Clearly, the Decalogue (which came from Sinai, not Zion) is excluded in Revelation 14:12.  To conclude that this refers to the Decalogue would turn the gospel upside down--and would reverse the word of the Father, the testimony of the Lord Jesus, and both old and new testament writers as well.  The Greek excludes it.  And Jesus himself insisted that it is his words (not the Decalogue!) that will judge on the last day. 

I realize, GH, that you didn’t ask this, but since we’re so close to this topic, I’d just like to suggest that if “the commandments of God” in Revelation 14:12 does not mean the Decalogue, specifically the Sabbath, then Ellen’s whole scenario of the mark of the beast, the seal of God, and seventh-day Sabbath keepers being the only ones saved, falls apart. 

If the old covenant laws, which included the 10 commandments, are no longer in effect, what does it mean to “fulfill the law of Christ?” Gal 6:2 There must be a law, right?  Isaiah 42:4 says “The isles shall wait for his law.” And Isaiah 2:3 (see also Heb 12:22) “For out of Zion (not Sinai) shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.” “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ . . .” (Romans 8) Or “He that has my commandments and keeps them” (John 14:21) Or “Whosoever hears these sayings of mine and does them” (Matt 7:24) And “You sin against Christ.” (1 Cor 8:12) Paul says he is “under the law of Christ.” (1 Cor 9:21).  These texts show us that the laws of Christ are given throughout the new testament, in the writings of the apostles, as Acts 1:2 states.  Bearing one another’s burdens, loving one another, remembering me (when you take this cup), forgiving our debtors, standing fast in the freedom, are a few examples. 

And yes, to answer your question, the law of Christ prohibits murder!  There are many calls to holy living in the New Testament--to a life hidden in Christ, who has truly fulfilled all the law for us.  We are complete in him.

GH, I’m having a hard time taking you seriously.  I’ve re-read some of your posts and just don’t think it is worth my time to respond further to you.

I wish you well.

Bob