JULY 6–12 COMMENTARY

Lesson 2: “Blueprint for a Better World”

In this week’s lesson, it becomes obvious that parts of Scripture are being used randomly, and often out of context, where it supports Adventist beliefs, and the author branches out into what is a typical 19th to 20th century misunderstanding and twisting of Scripture in order to make it fit into the Adventist pattern of thought and not to openly contradict the Adventist “prophet”.

First of all, there seems to be a serious lack of understanding of the difference between the Old Covenant and the New with a willingness to combine them when it supports preconceived ideas. All the while, the author ignores the Adventist insistence that the so-called “ceremonial” laws were fulfilled and ended while clinging to some of them that fit his narrative.

From the lesson:

“After their years of oppression, God took the opportunity to establish a new kind of society with these former slaves. He wanted them to live in a different way and to establish a society that would continue to be sustainable and viable. His plan was that this new kind of society would be a model for the surrounding nations and, like Abraham, that the blessings they received from God also would bless the whole world.”

This seems to make God’s plan for Israel’s entire economy to be nothing more than a model for other nations to follow in organization, social relations, and farming methods. The fact is, many of the rules for the Israelite nation were specifically to separate them from other nations—things like circumcision, food laws and the very fact that they were to be a theocracy giving worship to the one true God instead of multiple gods like the nations around them.

On the surface, it would seem to be merely saying something that makes the author sound modern and up to date—‘sustainable and viable’ are currently popular words to throw around even when the user doesn’t know their more serious implications.

But on closer inspection, there seems to be a more subtle reason for saying that the laws given to Israel were in fact also for other nations who wished to have a ‘sustainable and viable’ society. By hinting that Israel’s laws may have been for everyone else too, it makes it seem logical that what is discussed on Monday—The Ten Commandments—and on Wednesday—Second Tithing—are also things that apply to everyone, not just to Israel.

The idea that this is just a model for other nations to follow which would then bless them too, completely ignores the Biblical fact that it is Jesus Himself, who would be from the nation of Israel, that would be the blessing to the whole world. The blessing did not come from the laws that governed society. 

The entire Law, including the 10 Commandments, did nothing to make people right with God but, rather, show us that we cannot make ourselves right with God. The whole Law shows us our hopeless condition and points us to the only solution — Jesus Christ. See the entire book of Galatians for a clear, in-depth explanation.

 

The Ten Commandments

From the lesson:

“While many of these statements” (the 10 Commandments) “are brief, we should not underestimate the breadth of their impact and the comprehensiveness of the Ten Commandments as the law of life. For example, the sixth commandment—“ ‘You shall not murder’ ” (Exod. 20:13, NIV)—summarizes and includes “all acts of injustice that tend to shorten life” as well as “a selfish neglect of caring for the needy or suffering.”—Ellen G. White, Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 308.”

First of all, it is dangerous to use an unreliable source as your authority. The source quoted above, EGW, often contradicted Scripture and even herself, while both adding to and leaving out things that the Bible says, whenever those things seemed to disagree with her ideas.

Second of all, the 10 Commandments were not a universal “law of life”. In fact, they were very narrow and specific as the very words of the covenant God made with Israel. 

Read Exodus 34 where God had Moses replace the stone tablets which he had broken when he observed the worship of the golden calf. God said He would make a covenant with Israel and after restating some of the commands regarding feast days and other behaviors, God says in verse 27:

“Then the Lord said to Moses, “Write down these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel.” 

This is followed immediately by verse 28:

“So he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did not eat bread or drink water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments.”

The 10 Commandments were the words of the treaty or covenant and were in fact kept inside the Ark of the Covenant. And God clearly and repeatedly said that the covenant He made with them was with only them. This is stated by Moses in the Deuteronomy 5 listing of the 10 Commandments where he said, in verse 3:

“The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, with all those of us alive here today.”

Not only is that covenant made with those alive that day but you can also see that this covenant was not made with anyone before. No mention is made of those rules and laws being for everyone else — only Israel.

From the lesson:

“Similarly, the prohibition against stealing (see Exod. 20:15) condemns “slave dealing, and forbids wars of conquest.” It “requires the payment of just debts or wages,” as well as prohibiting “every attempt to advantage oneself by the ignorance, weakness, or misfortune of another” (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 309).

Here again, we have a quote from an unreliable source who is clearly adding to the meaning of the words. If God condemns “slave dealing”, why did He give instructions on how to treat slaves but nothing about not having or acquiring slaves? See Leviticus 25:44, Exodus 12:44, Exodus 21:1-10 for God’s detailed instructions on buying and selling slaves — which is literally “slave dealing” — and other instructions on how to treat slaves.

As far as forbidding “wars of conquest” just read Deuteronomy 20 where God gives detailed instructions on going to war to conquer other nations. In fact, verse 1 tells them that when they go to war against other nations they are not to fear as the Lord who brought them out of Egypt will be with them. And further, God commanded them to “go to war” with the inhabitants of Canaan and kill them or drive them out.

From the lesson:

“So, imagine a society in which each of the Ten Commandments was taken seriously and lived out fully. It would be an active, vibrant society in which everyone enthusiastically acted on their love for God by loving and caring for one another.”

If living by the 10 Commandments would lead to that “active, vibrant society” there would have been no need for much of the Sermon on the Mount. In that sermon, Jesus pointed out how those rules were merely external and did nothing to change the heart. As He expanded on them, He showed how the inward heart, or motives, are the real issue. 

Besides being the very words of the Covenant between God and Israel, the 10 Commandments were abbreviated guidelines for external behavior which did nothing for the inner heart. Simply following those 10 rules might make for less bad outward behavior, but they do nothing to change the heart. And without that change of heart, the new birth, only outward actions change but the heart is still full of sin.

On a side note, it’s interesting to see the confusion that can happen when you focus on each little idea without looking to see if it fits within the whole. In Monday’s lesson we read this: “Similarly, the prohibition against stealing (see Exod. 20:15) condemns “slave dealing……” 

We’ve already seen that this is completely wrong when compared with Deuteronomy 20. 

But it’s even more absurd when you compare it to this in Tuesday’s lesson:

“Even before the instructions for building the tabernacle, God gives three chapters of laws about such things as the appropriate treatment of slaves, …”

I guess when you expect people to read only one day’s lesson at a time, you can contradict yourself with little chance that the reader will see the contradiction. Somehow, this just does not seem like a good way to study the Bible!

 

Second Tithing

From the lesson:

“Many Christians recognize and follow the Bible’s instructions on returning tithe. Usually referenced from Malachi 3:10, it is a simple formula, with believers giving 10 percent of their income—or ‘increase’—to support the work of the church in spreading the gospel.”

There are so many things wrong with that one paragraph that we’d do well to take them one at a time.

1. Just because many Christians think something is true in no way means that it is necessarily Biblically sound.
   
   
2. Referencing Malachi 3:10 is the typical go-to source for forcing tithe-paying but it is always taken out of context.
   
   Malachi mentions tithes, but the strong words of God are specifically for Israel and the unfaithful priests. This is clear by the use (3 times) of the word priest and the 8 times it uses various names that refer specifically to Israel such as Levi, Jerusalem, Judah, Israel, Jacob, Moses, and Elijah.
   
   In fact, the New Testament is quite clear that Israel and the Church are not the same entity, so commands under the Old Covenant do not in any way apply to the Church unless specifically restated in the New Covenant with the Church.
   
   
3. In 3:10, the verse most often used (or misused), God mentions the storehouses. This refers specifically to the places for the storage of food given as provision for the Levites who did not own land and for the poor who were fed by the tithes of produce. 
   
   It would be quite a stretch to say that “storehouses” can mean a modern church building.
   
   
4. Nowhere in Malachi 3:10, or anywhere else for that matter, is there a “simple formula” specifying 10% to be given. The command was for the first part of the harvest and the firstborn of the cattle, not any specific percent.
   
   
5. If you read verse 10 carefully, you will notice that it talks about “all the tithes”, not just one tithe. But when is the last time you heard the Church leadership talk about making sure we give all three tithes?
   
   
6. We, the Church, do not have a temple. Instead we are the temple, individually and corporately. There are no Biblical grounds for inserting the Church (the building or the organization) into this and, without a temple, there is no Old Covenant worship possible.
   
   That worship, by God’s command, involved sacrifices for sins. The Ultimate sacrifice for our sins has already been made, and there is no longer any use for a temple.
   
   To change it to say that a necessary equivalent is that of helping pay for the building, the land and the electric bill for the church is an artificial assumption without Biblical support.
   
   
7. The Church, operating under the New Covenant, has many instructions in the New Testament for freely giving to support the work of God. But it does not include any reference to obligatory tithing of any preset amount. All it says is that God loves a cheerful giver, not the giver of 10%.
   
   
8. If you actually read what God said about tithing you will see that it is never about money. Israel was an agrarian society —produce and animals — and those are the things God said to ‘tithe’.

For instance, in Deuteronomy 14

You shall surely tithe all the produce from what you sow, which comes out of the field every year. You shall eat in the presence of the Lord your God, at the place where He chooses to establish His name, the tithe of your grain, your new wine, your oil, and the firstborn of your herd and your flock, so that you may learn to fear the Lord your God always. If the distance is so great for you that you are not able to bring the tithe, since the place where the Lord your God chooses to set His name is too far away from you when the Lord your God blesses you, then you shall exchange it for money, and bind the money in your hand and go to the place which the Lord your God chooses. 

You may spend the money for whatever your heart desires: for oxen, or sheep, or wine, or strong drink, or whatever your heart desires; and there you shall eat in the presence of the Lord your God and rejoice, you and your household. Also you shall not neglect the Levite who is in your town, for he has no portion or inheritance among you. 

At the end of every third year you shall bring out all the tithe of your produce in that year, and shall deposit it in your town. The Levite, because he has no portion or inheritance among you, and the alien, the orphan and the widow who are in your town, shall come and eat and be satisfied, in order that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work of your hand which you do.

Deuteronomy 18:3–5 says this: 

Now this shall be the priests’ due from the people, from those who offer a sacrifice, either an ox or a sheep, of which they shall give to the priest the shoulder and the two cheeks and the stomach. You shall give him the first fruits of your grain, your new wine, and your oil, and the first shearing of your sheep. For the Lord your God has chosen him and his sons from all your tribes, to stand and serve in the name of the Lord forever.

Deuteronomy 26 speaks about giving the first of the harvest and the first-born animals, not money. The one giving the first fruits was to recount to the priest how the Lord brought them out of Egypt and the gift of produce being given was in thanks for that and for the Lord’s generous provision. 

We were never brought out of the land of Egypt, so this clearly refers only to Israel, not the Church.

And, in the New Covenant, we are all priests in God’s service. We have no priest without income who needs to be supported by our tithes.

On a side note, I wonder how the Adventist church manages to avoid Deuteronomy 14:26 which says:

You may spend the money for whatever your heart desires: for oxen, or sheep, or wine, or strong drink, or whatever your heart desires; and there you shall eat in the presence of the Lord your God and rejoice, you and your household.

There is no way around that command — if you live too far from the temple, convert your first-fruits into money, use that money to buy wine and strong drink and imbibe it before the Lord and rejoice! Funny how you never hear a sermon about this one!

But, back to the lesson. After assuming things about tithing not stated in the Bible the lesson goes on to say this:

“Entrusted with these tithes, churches usually have strict guidelines about how to use these funds, primarily applying them to support direct ministry and evangelism.”

My question is this — if the Church does not follow its own strict guidelines on using the funds taken from the members, but instead uses them dishonestly or even illegally, what is the member’s obligation to keep entrusting money to those who have so proven to be untrustworthy? 

If you know they continue to use the money carelessly or illegally, should you still keep giving it to them? If you do, knowing that they misuse the money, aren’t you then complicit in their deceit and dishonest dealings? 

1 Corinthians 5:9-11 seems to address this.

I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one.

Giving to the covetous person or organization when you know that that person or organization is dishonest and greedy, “which amounts to idolatry”, (Col. 3:5) is the same thing as associating with that person; and by doing so you seem to be condoning that behavior and even joining in with it. 

There are plenty of worthy causes that help the poor and needy — all things being upheld by this entire quarter’s lesson plan — and their honesty can be easily verified on the internet.

Moving on. 

 

The Year of Jubilee

From the lesson we learn:

“God’s solution was to decree that land could never be sold absolutely. Instead, land would be sold only until the next “year of jubilee,” at which time the land would revert to its allotted family, and any land sold could be redeemed by the seller or another member of the seller’s family at any time.”

It is as if saying that because of this problem that came up, God had to come up with a solution. This makes God reactionary to human problems rather than the Supreme Lord who governs and directs man. 

Further down, there is a quote from EGW:

“And as Moses should point out their sins, they were to devote themselves to humiliation, fasting and prayer, that their hearts might be cleansed from iniquity” (PP 305.5).

If this is simply the 19th century use of the word ‘humiliation’ to mean humility, it would make sense. But to “devote to humiliation” seems to imply something more than just humility of attitude. It implies more of an expression of self-loathing or self-punishment. This would be similar to the Catholic practice followed by some priests of beating themselves until bloody to “mortify” or cleanse themselves of sin. Nowhere in the Bible is this practice ordered to anyone and nowhere is there any indication in the Bible that the Israelites were to do so.

In Friday’s EGW quotes we have this paragraph:

“The law was not spoken at this time exclusively for the benefit of the Hebrews. God honored them by making them the guardians and keepers of His law, but it was to be held as a sacred trust for the whole world” (PP 305).

First of all, the entire Law was one coherent unit, and there is no Biblical support for the idea that it can be separated into different parts. And, since it is a complete unit, how would that be for the whole world? No one else was instructed to give sacrifices or obey any part of the Law.

Bearing in mind that to the Adventist mind “the Law” means the 10 Commandments, let’s look at the two places where they are stated. First let’s look at Exodus 20:2 :

I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.

Next is Deuteronomy 5:2-5:

The Lord our God made a covenant with us at Horeb. The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, with all those of us alive here today. The Lord spoke to you face to face at the mountain from the midst of the fire, while I was standing between the Lord and you at that time, to declare to you the word of the Lord; for you were afraid because of the fire and did not go up the mountain.

Clearly, “the whole world” was not brought out of the land of Egypt, so the Law was not for everyone in the world. Also, it was not “the whole world” who stood before the Lord with Moses standing between them and God, as this was specifically spoken to Israel. As far as the Law being the 10 Commandments goes, look again at Ex 34:28:

So he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did not eat bread or drink water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments.

They were the very words of the covenant between God and Israel — the Old Covenant — and the rest of the world is not under that covenant.

I think the most amazing statement yet is the one put in the form of a question at the end of Friday’s lesson:

How should we understand and relate to these laws today? How do we choose which of these are applicable and relevant to us today?

In context, this is still talking about the 10 Commandments given at Mt. Sinai where Moses had been told to fence off the mountain, the people were to prepare themselves and their clothes for the encounter and then the Law — the 10 Commandments — was given.

Why is an author of the Adventist lesson asking us how we choose which parts of the 10 Commandments are applicable to us today? It seems a very odd question to be asking people who think they live and die by the 10 Commandments.