A “Traffic Ticket” Theology? A Reaction to Doug Batchelor

The Analogy:

In this short, Pastor Doug Batchelor uses a classic illustration often heard in our former circles: he compares God’s Law to a speed limit. When you break it, you are "under the law" (under its penalty). When the officer gives you a warning instead of a ticket, you are "under grace" (forgiven).

The Former Adventist Philippines Perspective:

While this analogy sounds logical on the surface, many of us who have studied the transition from the Old to the New Covenant find it theologically incomplete. It relies on a specific definition of "Under the Law" that misses the Apostle Paul’s deeper point in Romans and Galatians.

1. "Under the Law" is a Jurisdiction, Not Just a Guilt Trip

Pastor Doug defines "Under the Law" strictly as being under the condemnation of the Law. However, in Galatians 3 and 4, Paul describes being "under the law" as being under a guardian or a schoolmaster. It refers to a time period and a covenantal administration of the Old Covenant.

To be "under grace" (Romans 6:14) doesn't just mean we were forgiven for speeding; it means we have changed jurisdictions entirely. We are no longer under the supervision of the Mosaic Covenant (the schoolmaster); we are now sons and daughters led by the Spirit.

2. The Flaw in the Speed Limit Comparison

The problem with the traffic analogy is the implication: The officer forgives you so you can go back to driving under the same traffic code.

In Seventh-day Adventist theology, grace is often presented as a pardon that equips you to finally keep the Ten Commandments perfectly. But the New Testament teaching is more radical. We didn't just get a warning ticket; we died to the law (Romans 7:4) so that we could be married to another Jesus Christ.

We are not drivers trying to keep the speed limit better; we are new creations operating under the Law of Christ (1 Corinthians 9:21), where love, not the letter of the Decalogue, is the fulfilling of the law.

3. The Danger of Galatianism

By keeping believers focused on the "speed limit" (the Ten Commandments) as their primary rule of life, this teaching risks placing Filipino believers back under a yoke that neither our fathers nor we were able to bear (Acts 15:10). True grace isn't just "mercy for past sins"; it is the new reality of living in the Spirit, where the fruit of the Spirit comes naturally from abiding in the Vine, not from fear of the blue and red lights in the rearview mirror.

Conclusion:

We respect Pastor Doug’s zeal, but we encourage our kababayans (countrymen) to read Galatians without the lens of the "traffic ticket." You will find that you are not just a forgiven speeder, you are a child of God, free from the schoolmaster, and alive in Christ.

Video Referenced:

Under the Law or Under Grace?

FAP Midweek Prayer Meeting

Tara Bible Study Tayo: Analyzing "Father Dags" Post through the Lens of Scripture

Here is a point-by-point apologetic response to the arguments presented in Father Dags' post. This response focuses on Biblical consistency, the distinction between "remembrance" and "ritual," and the logical fallacies used in the original post.

The "Picture Analogy" Fallacy

Father Dags' Argument: “When I see a picture of my Mama and Papa... I am not loving the paper. I am loving the people in the picture. In the same way... when I see the image of the Santo Niño... It reminds me of God.”

The Rebuttal:

While this analogy sounds reasonable on the surface ("common sense"), it fails to address the way the object is treated.

The Difference in Action: We may keep a photo of our parents in a wallet or on a wall to remember them, but we do not bow down to the photo, burn incense to it, dress it in elaborate clothes, parade it around the city, or wipe handkerchiefs on it expecting healing or blessings.

The Biblical Distinction: The issue isn't just "having an image" for art or memory; the issue is veneration. In the Bible, God strictly forbids using images as a medium for worship. In Exodus 32, when the Israelites built the Golden Calf, they actually claimed they were worshipping Yahweh (Exodus 32:5). They used the image to focus on God, yet God called it a "great sin" because He commanded that He not be worshipped through created forms.

The "Simple Logic" vs. Biblical Authority

Father Dags' Argument: “At this point, we are still speaking in terms of simple logic... we have not yet entered into its proper biblical exegesis.”

The Rebuttal:

"Simple logic" or human reasoning cannot override clear Biblical commands.

God is Spirit: In Deuteronomy 4:15-16, Moses warns the people: "You saw no form of any kind the day the Lord spoke to you at Horeb... Therefore watch yourselves very carefully, so that you do not become corrupt and make for yourselves an idol, an image of any shape."

The Second Commandment: The prohibition is not just against worshipping other gods, but against making a carved image to bow down to (Exodus 20:4-5). Human logic says, "It helps me focus." Divine logic says, "I am the Creator; do not reduce Me to the image of a creature."

Proverbs 14:12: Scripture warns, "There is a way that appears to be right, but in the end it leads to death." We cannot rely on "common sense" when God has given specific instructions on how He wants to be worshipped (in Spirit and in Truth, John 4:24).

The "Pride" Accusation (Ad Hominem)

Father Dags' Argument: “Why do you find it difficult to understand? Answer: It is pride (ego) that makes people refuse this simple truth... the heart that refuses to be humble.”

The Rebuttal:

This is a logical fallacy known as Ad Hominem (attacking the person rather than the argument).

Gaslighting the Bereans: It is not "pride" to examine the Scriptures to see if what is being taught is true; it is what the noble Bereans did in Acts 17:11.

"The people here were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, since they received the word with eagerness and examined the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so." Acts 17:11(CSB)

True Humility: True humility is submitting to God's Word even when it contradicts our traditions or feelings. It takes more humility to say, "My tradition says this statue helps, but God’s Word says I should not bow to it, so I will obey God," than it does to simply follow the popular cultural practice. Using "humility" as a weapon to silence valid Biblical concern is manipulative.

The Sto. Niño Specifically

Father Dags' Argument: “It reminds me of God, who was with me during my deepest pain.”

The Rebuttal:

We must ask: Which God is being represented?

The Historical Jesus vs. The Perpetual Child: The Sto. Niño depicts Jesus as a perpetual child/king. However, Jesus is no longer a baby. He grew up, died for our sins, resurrected, and is now glorified at the right hand of the Father (Revelation 1:12-16).

Paul's Warning: In 2 Corinthians 5:16, Paul says, "So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer." Focusing on a "statue version" of Jesus often creates a localized "idol" distinct from the Living Christ. This is why many devotees feel the need to travel to a specific statue (e.g., in Cebu) to get a prayer answered, implying the "power" is tied to that specific image, which is the very definition of idolatry.

Summary Argument

If the logic is simply "it's just a picture to remember Him," then the Catholic Church should be willing to stop all rituals associated with the statues (bowing, kissing, procession, dressing up). If they cannot stop those rituals without the religion feeling "empty," then the statue is not just a reminder; it has become a central object of worship, which is exactly what the Bible warns against.