|
INVESTIGATING
ADVENTISM — Q&A RESPONSE Pastoral Theological Response Pastor Ronald V. Obidos II |
Former Adventists Philippines |
|
QUESTION: |
|
How does the entire Law relate to us now that Christ has come? Did it really change? What changed? What is your context for 'relate'? For 'Law'? I also want to raise the matter of the Sabbath is it not a moral principle that reflects God's character of rest and non-coercion? And is the debate about which day or abolition really missing the point? |
PASTORAL OPENING
This is one of the finest questions I have received on this
platform not because it challenges me, but because it reveals a mind that is
thinking with the text rather than simply at the text. You are
not proof-texting. You are doing theology. That deserves a thorough, honest
response.
I will address your questions in sequence:
(1) What do we mean
by 'relate'?
(2) What is 'the Law'?
(3) What actually changed with Christ's
coming?
(4) Is the Sabbath a moral principle reflecting God's character?
(5)
Are the popular Sabbath debates missing the real point?
I. WHAT DO WE MEAN BY 'HOW THE LAW
RELATES'?
The word
'relate' is a hermeneutical question, not an abolition claim.
When I write that the question is 'how does the entire Law
relate to us now?' I am not asking whether God's moral will is
still binding. God's moral will is eternal and unchanging because it flows from
His unchanging character. What I am asking is a hermeneutical question: What
is the interpretive lens through which a New Covenant believer reads and
applies the Mosaic economy?
The word 'relate' carries the sense of mediation. In
the Old Covenant, God's eternal moral will was mediated through the Mosaic
legislative structure typological ceremonies, national civil laws, and moral
precepts were all woven together into one covenant fabric. In the New Covenant,
that same moral will is now mediated through Christ as the telos (Romans
10:4, τέλος) the goal, the culmination, the hermeneutical key.
|
|
Romans
10:4 (ESV) For Christ is the
end [telos] of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. |
This does not mean the Law is erased. It means Christ is the
lens. When a New Covenant believer asks 'how do I live in conformity with God's
will?' the answer is not 'Go back to the Mosaic covenant as the governing
covenant', but 'Look at Christ, who fulfilled and summed up all that the
Law pointed to, and who now writes that Law on your heart by the Spirit'
(Jeremiah 31:33; 2 Corinthians 3:6–8; Hebrews 8:10).
II. WHAT DO WE MEAN BY 'THE LAW'?
The word
'Law' (Torah / νόμος) is not monolithic, context determines its referent.
You rightly press for definition. In biblical usage, nomos (νόμος)
and Torah (תּוֹרָה) can refer to different things depending on context:
|
Referent |
Scope |
New
Covenant Status |
|
The Mosaic Covenant
as a covenant administration |
The whole Sinai economy
as a bilateral covenant structure |
Obsolete as a covenant
(Heb 8:13) not because God's will changed, but because its typological
scaffolding has been fulfilled |
|
Moral precepts
(God's eternal will) |
Commandments reflecting
God's unchanging character |
Binding now mediated
through Christ and written on the heart by the Spirit |
|
Ceremonial /
typological law |
Sacrifices, priesthood,
dietary code, Levitical feasts |
Fulfilled in Christ the shadow has yielded to the substance (Col 2:16–17; Heb 10:1) |
|
Civil / national law
of Israel |
Theocratic governance
of the nation-state of Israel |
Not directly binding on
Gentile nations or the Church, though its principles inform wisdom |
So when I speak of 'the entire Law' relating to us through
Christ, I mean: all of it points to Christ. Moral law fulfilled and
internalized. Ceremonial law fulfilled and transcended. Civil law fulfilled
in the Kingdom ethic. None of it is ignored. All of it is read through the
telos.
III. WHAT ACTUALLY CHANGED WITH CHRIST'S
COMING?
You said
it well and I agree with you entirely.
|
YOUR
STATEMENT AFFIRMED |
|
"What
is genuinely new with Christ's coming is not the content of love, for love
has always been God's standard, but the fullness and finality of the
provision for it." |
This is precisely correct and I want to say this
clearly: your instinct here is not in tension with New Covenant Theology it is
New Covenant Theology at its best. You have grasped that the moral content
of God's will did not change. The hesed (חֶסֶד) that animated the Old
Covenant was always the same steadfast love of the same God. Hosea 6:6 and
Micah 6:8 were not introducing a new ethic they were calling Israel
back to the original intention beneath the external forms.
What changed with Christ's coming is covenantal, not moral:
|
What
Changed |
In What
Way |
|
The
administration changed |
From external stone
tablets mediated through Moses to the Spirit writing on the heart (Jer 31:33;
2 Cor 3:3) |
|
The
sacrifice changed |
From repeated animal
offerings to the once-for-all (ἐφάπαξ) atoning work of Christ (Heb 10:10) |
|
The
priesthood changed |
From the Levitical
order to the eternal high priesthood of Christ after the order of Melchizedek
(Heb 7:11–17) |
|
The
access changed |
From the mediated
presence behind the veil to the torn curtain and direct access to the Father
through Christ (Heb 10:19–22) |
|
The
scope changed |
From one nation-state
to all nations the covenant community is now the global church gathered in
Christ |
And you are right again: "Covenants do not create the
Law. They carry it." This is a profound observation. The Decalogue did
not originate at Sinai it was promulgated at Sinai. Cain was judged
for murder before Moses. Abraham was reckoned righteous before circumcision.
The moral law is not a Mosaic invention; it is the eternal will of the eternal
God. When the Mosaic covenant passed away as a governing covenant, it did not
take God's eternal will with it. What ended was the form of mediation,
not the content of the will.
IV. IS THE SABBATH A MORAL PRINCIPLE
REFLECTING GOD'S CHARACTER?
This is
your most penetrating question and it deserves a careful, non-defensive
answer.
You ask: "Is rest a character of God? Is non-coercive
rest not a moral reflection of a loving God? How is that not a moral law?"
I want to commend you again because you are asking the right
question. And the answer is more nuanced than the usual SDA-vs-ex-SDA debate
allows. Let me be precise:
A. The
Principle of Sabbath Rest IS Moral and Eternal
|
|
Genesis
2:2–3 And on the seventh
day God finished his work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day
from all his work that he had done. So God blessed the seventh day and made
it holy. |
God's rest at creation is real and carries genuine theological
weight. It is not merely legislative it is revelatory. It reveals
something about God's character: He is not a God of relentless performance. He
is a God who ceases, who savors, who enjoys His creation. You are right that
this reflects a non-coercive, non-anxious posture.
Furthermore, sabbath rest as a theological category runs
through the entire canon: the Promised Land as rest (Deuteronomy 12:9–10), the
Psalms' invitation to enter God's rest (Psalm 95:11), and most climactically,
the author of Hebrews developing sabbath rest as a typological reality that
finds its fulfillment in Christ:
|
|
Hebrews
4:9–10 (ESV) So then, there
remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, for whoever has entered God's
rest has also rested from his works as God did from his. |
This is a moral and spiritual principle. The Sabbath teaches
us that salvation is not earned by human striving it is received in the rest
that God provides. This principle does not end with Christ's coming; it is fulfilled
and perfected in Christ's coming.
B. But
the Specific Mosaic Sabbath Regulation Is Typological, Not Simply Moral
Here is where I must be careful and honest with you. There is
a difference between:
|
The
Sabbath Principle (Moral / Eternal) |
The
Mosaic Sabbath Regulation (Typological / Covenantal) |
|
God rests creation is
sacred and good |
Specifically the 7th
day (Saturday) required observance |
|
Rest reveals a
non-anxious, non-coercive God |
Death penalty for
Sabbath violation (Num 15:32–36) a national covenant sanction |
|
Humans are not machines dignity requires cessation |
Tied to the Exodus
narrative as a memorial of deliverance from Egypt (Deut 5:15) |
|
Ultimate rest is found
in God alone, not in works |
The sign of the Mosaic
covenant specifically with Israel (Exod 31:13–17) |
|
This is fulfilled and
perfected in Christ (Heb 4:9–10) |
Colossians 2:16 Paul
explicitly places Sabbath in the category of shadow-realities fulfilled in
Christ |
|
|
Colossians
2:16–17 (ESV) Therefore let no one
pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a
festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to
come, but the substance belongs to Christ. |
C. Why
the 9-Commandment Objection Requires This Exact Distinction
You rightly press: “Why claim that 9 commandments reflect
God’s character but exclude the Sabbath? Is rest not God’s character?”
I affirm that rest is God's character. The issue is not
whether rest reflects God it does, profoundly. The issue is the mode of
fulfillment. The other nine commandments carry moral content that has no
typological fulfillment-and-transcendence in Christ they are not shadows
pointing to Him; they are direct reflections of His eternal moral will. But the
Sabbath, as Paul explicitly states in Colossians 2:16–17, functions as a shadow
pointing to Christ meaning it was fulfilled in Christ, not
bypassed. Its moral core rest in God, trust over striving is now
experienced continuously in Christ, not recaptured once per week in a legal
observance.
|
CRITICAL
DISTINCTION |
|
The Sabbath commandment is not excluded because rest
is unimportant. It is fulfilled which is the highest possible honor a
typological regulation can receive. A type that is fulfilled is not erased;
it is completed. Christ did not abolish the Sabbath, He became the
Sabbath-rest into whom we enter by faith (Matthew 11:28–30; Hebrews 4:9–10). |
V. ARE THE POPULAR SABBATH DEBATES MISSING
THE REAL POINT?
|
PASTORAL
VERDICT |
|
You are correct. And
this may be one of the most mature observations about the Sabbath debate I
have ever received on this platform. |
The popular Sabbath debate has been captured by a
reductionistic question: Saturday or Sunday? This is a calendrical
argument. But the Sabbath as a theological category is asking a far deeper
question: Will you trust God enough to stop?
The Sabbath reveals:
|
God is
Provider, not just Employer |
Israel could not work
for their own sustenance on the 7th day. They had to trust YHWH. This is a
radical posture of dependence. |
|
Human
dignity exceeds productivity |
The Sabbath ethic
protected slaves, animals, and foreigners from being instrumentalized. You
are more than what you produce. |
|
Creation
is not a resource to be exploited |
Sabbath rest extended
to the land (Lev 25). There is a creational rhythm that human economy must
honor. |
|
Salvation
is received, not achieved |
Hebrews 4 makes this
eschatological the rest we cease from is the rest of works-righteousness.
Christ is our Sabbath. |
These moral and theological dimensions of the Sabbath do
not require the Mosaic calendar regulation to remain operative. In fact,
when Jesus says "Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I
will give you rest" (Matthew 11:28) He is not inviting people to a
day. He is inviting them to a Person. He is the fulfillment of every
truth the Sabbath was teaching.
VI. SUMMARY VERDICT GRID
|
Claim /
Concept |
Pastoral
Clarification |
Verdict |
|
'The content of love
has not changed "hesed" was always the standard' |
Fully agreed. You have
grasped the continuity of God's moral will across covenants. This is
precisely correct. |
AFFIRMED ✓ |
|
'Covenants carry the
Law; they don't create it' |
Agreed. God's eternal
will pre-exists every covenant administration. Covenants are the packaging,
not the content. |
AFFIRMED ✓ |
|
'Rest is a character
of God and reflects a Loving God' |
Agreed fully. The
Sabbath principle reveals God's non-coercive, non-anxious, provider
character. This is moral content. |
AFFIRMED ✓ |
|
'The popular Sabbath
debates miss the primary principle' |
Agreed. Saturday vs.
Sunday is a reductionistic debate that misses the Sabbath's deeper theology
of rest-in-God. |
AFFIRMED ✓ |
|
'The Sabbath as a
specific Mosaic regulation remains binding in the New Covenant' |
This is where the
distinction must be maintained. The principle is eternal; the specific Mosaic
administration is the shadow. The substance has come in Christ (Col 2:16–17;
Heb 4:9–10). |
REFINED ↗ |
|
'Excluding the
Sabbath from God's character reflection is wrong' |
Partially correct if
the claim is that rest reflects God's character. But the Sabbath commandment
as a weekly mandatory observance is typological, not merely moral. Its
exclusion from the 'nine binding moral commandments' category is not because
rest is unimportant it is because it has been fulfilled at a higher level
in Christ. |
NUANCED ⚖ |
VII. QUESTIONS FOR
FURTHER REFLECTION
|
QUESTION
1 — On Fulfillment |
|
If Christ is the telos of the Law its goal
and fulfillment and if the Sabbath rest of Hebrews 4:9–10 is now found in
Him, would it be more accurate to say the Sabbath is fulfilled and
perfected in Christ rather than abolished or continued? And if so, what
does it mean that believers already live in perpetual Sabbath rest through
union with Christ (Matthew 11:28–30)? |
|
QUESTION
2 — On the Distinction |
|
You rightly say that the Sabbath principle of rest and
non-coercion reflects God's character. Would you also agree that the specific
Mosaic form of that principle a mandatory 7th-day observance under
penalty of death (Numbers 15:32–36), tied explicitly to the Exodus covenant
(Exodus 31:13–17) is the covenantal carrier of that principle, and
not the principle itself? If so, is it possible to honor the principle fully
while recognizing that the Mosaic carrier has been fulfilled-and-superseded
by Christ? |
|
QUESTION
3 — On Experience |
|
If the deepest truth the Sabbath teaches is ‘trust
God enough to stop, because He is Provider and your worth is not in your
productivity’ is that truth more fully expressed in a weekly observance
of a calendar day, or in the posture of continuous faith-rest in Christ, who
said ‘Take my yoke upon you... and you will find rest for your souls’(Matthew
11:29)? Which form of observance makes the principle smaller or larger calendrical regulation, or Christological fulfillment? |
PASTORAL CLOSING
The questions you have raised are not questions I want to
dismiss they are questions I want to inhabit with you. You are thinking at
the level of the text's own concerns, not the level of sectarian debate. And
that is exactly where good theology happens.
You are right that the Sabbath is more than a calendar
argument. You are right that rest reflects God's character. You are right that
hesed was never absent from the Old Covenant. And you are right that the
provision not the content is what Christ brought to fullness.
My disagreement with the SDA framework is not that they take
rest seriously. It is that they mistake the shadow for the substance and in
doing so, they place believers back under a covenantal economy that has been
fulfilled and not revoked but transcended by its own telos.
Come to Christ. Rest in Him. Every day is a Sabbath for those who live by faith in the Son of God.
FORMER ADVENTISTS PHILIPPINES
“Freed by the Gospel. Firm in the Word.”
Former Adventists Philippines Association, Inc
SEC Registration No: 2025090219381-03
For more inquiries, contact us:
Email: formeradventist.ph@gmail.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/formeradventistph
Partner with me in advancing this ministry. Be part of this mission! Your support helps us continue gospel-centered outreach and resources
• GCash: 0969-514-3944
• PayPal: paypal.me/formeradventistsph
No comments:
Post a Comment