The Seventh-day Adventist Denomination's New Position on the Ceremonial and Moral Law of God -- The Ten Commandments
Foreword by Ron Beaulieu: The following document was presented by Pastors Nathan Quick, and a pastor Becker. David Quick, pastor Nathan's father, gave a copy to Karl Wagner and asked him what he thought of it. Karl responded and I have put his response in pink print. David Quick sent me a copy and I have made my comments within the document inblue print. End note.
A new book came off the Andrews University Press in 2003 called Questions on Doctrine, Annotated Edition. This book deals with the old edition of Questions on Doctrine which was published in 1957, with explanations as to how the Seventh-day Adventist denomination now responds to the questions dealt with in the old edition.
For the sake of clarification, the following will be used to differentiate:
The text from the old edition of Questions on Doctrine will bein red.
The text from The New Annotated Edition of Questions on Doctrine will bein this color.
The Ellen White and Bible quotations which we provide will be in bold.
Commentary by Ron Beaulieu are inthis color.
Comments inthis color are Karl Wagner's feeble attempts to discredit the two pastor's findings.
Karl will argue anything that fits his grace plus nothing half gospel. He makes no attempt to hide the fact that he denies James of Scripture's testimony that we are justified (saved) by faith and works. Karl teaches the doctrine of the Nicolaitans that we are saved by faith (belief) alone without works that are empowered by Christ and the Holy Spirit. He will not admit that Abraham's choice to obey God was imputed to him as righteousness. He will not acknowledge the biblical fact that faith and love are imparted to us and if right choices are made due to motivation of faith in and love for Christ, such choices are imputed to us as righteousness as was the case with Abraham. He will not admit that repentance (genuine turning away from sin by the empowerment of the Holy Spirit) is the first work of genuine sanctification which accompanies justification or being saved. He maintains that justification is strictly forensic and imputed without any elements of accompanying faith and love generated works empowered by the Holy Spirit accompanying justification and being conditional to justification. He is out of line with James of Scripture and the following statement by Ellen White:
"God requires the entire surrender of the heart, before justification can take place" (1SM 366).
"No one can believe with the heart unto righteousness, and obtain justification by faith, while continuing the practice of those things which the Word of God forbids, or while neglecting any known duty....As God works in the heart, and man surrenders his will to God, and co-operates with God, he works out in the life what God WORKS IN by the Holy Spirit, and there is harmony between the purpose of the heart and the practice of the life. Every sin must be renounced as the hateful thing that crucified the Lord of life and glory....It is by continual surrender of the will, by continual obedience, that the blessing of justification is retained." E.G. White, Selected Messages, vol. 1, pp. 396-397.
Our personal comments (those of pastors Quick and Becker) will be in this plain type font and color.
All underlined emphasis will be ours.
The question on page 129 in the old edition is:
Question 13 "On what grounds do Seventh-day Adventists consider as separate the 'moral law' and the 'ceremonial law,' in view of what our Lord accomplished on Calvary's cross?"
The answer given by the author (or authors) of the old edition is:
"We feel that there are ample Biblical grounds for making this distinction. The Ten Commandments, or the Decalogue, constitute in principle God's eternal law. Not only is this law eternal, but it is immutable. It is the foundation of His throne; it is the expression of His character. Since it represents His character-or what God Himself is-we believe it is as eternal as the everlasting God." Questions on Doctrine, 1957 edition.
On page 111 of the New Annotated Edition of Questions on Doctrine there is comment on the above doctrine by the writers of this 2003 edition. They say:
"In the half century since the publication of Questions on Doctrine the understanding of the denomination has moved beyond some of the ideas expressed in this chapter. For example, Questions on Doctrine holds that the Ten Commandments 'constitute in principle God's eternal law.'" "Many Adventists today would tend to see the two great commandments of Matthew 22:36-40 as the basic expression of the principle of God's eternal law. In this context the Ten Commandments are viewed as an extension of the principles of the two great commands to love God supremely and to love others as oneself (see Rom. 13:8-10." "That position harmonizes with Ellen White, who wrote: 'The principles of the ten commandments existed before the fall, and were of a character suited to the condition of a holy order of beings. After the fall, the principles of those precepts were not changed, but additional precepts were given to meet man in his fallen state.' (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p.295; see also Selected Messages, book 1, pp. 220,230.
This quote of Sister White's has been taken out of context. She is not saying that any laws were added to the Ten Commandments after the fall, but is referring to the ceremonial law being added. Let us read it in its context in Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p. 295:
Some comments here. The author of the annotations of the newly released Questions on Doctrine is George R. Knight.
Please don't miss George's point. He is referring to how the Ten Commandments are written out. For instance, the eternal law of God would not say to angels that do not pro-create, "Do not dishonor your parents," or "Do not commit adultery." These commandments would not make sense to angels, nor apply. They are expressed in such a way that makes them applicable to fallen man. However, the further libel of charging George with nailing the Ten Commandments instead of the Ceremonial Law is built on an assumption. Read on.
Karl totally discounts the fact that Ellen White said there are other worlds that have not sinned. In order for them not to have sinned, the law must have been effect for them to not sin against. So God's Ten Commandment law was in effect before creation of this earth unless God created all the worlds at once, which is a possibility. Since the Sabbath was instituted partly as a rest from our own works of sin, it was not required before sin entered this world.
The strong "ASSUMPTION" is that some law was nailed to the cross. If it was not the ceremonial laws as contained in ordinances, then what, pray tell, was nailed to the cross? What other law was there than the Ten Commandments?
"The law of god existed before man was created. The angels were governed by it. Satan fell because he transgressed the principles of God's government. After Adam and Eve were created, God made known to them his law. It was not then written, but was rehearsed to them by Jehovah. The Sabbath of the fourth commandment was instituted in Eden. After God had made the world, and created man upon the earth, he made the Sabbath for man. After Adam's sin and fall nothing was taken from the law of God. The principles of Ten Commandments existed before the fall, and were of a character suited to the condition of a holy order of beings. After the fall, the principles of those precepts were not changed, but additional precepts were given to meet man in his fallen state. A system was then established requiring the sacrificing of beasts..." Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, pg. 295.
This is clearly talking about the ceremonial laws and the sacrificial system. This is pointed out because the authors of the New Annotated Edition of Questions on Doctrine however, make it appear that after the fall additional laws were added to God's moral law - the Ten Commandments, and this is not true.
Actually, it's this paper which demonstrates that God added a law to His immutable eternal law after creation...the Sabbath. "The Sabbath of the fourth commandment was instituted in Eden" [3SG 295] as written by sister White. What Knight suggests was "added" was not so much something added, but expressed to fallen man as never to unfallen angels. Not a New commandment, but new expressions of God's priniciples. The problem continues however when this charge is attached to the ceremonial laws and the exegisis of Col. 2:14.
Knight is saying that Christ bore our sins on his body (see on 1 Pt 2:24) while on the tree. Our sins were nailed on the cross. The work of Christ in heaven is that of making a pure people by the eternal removal of sin. It is far more then that of celestial accounting, but the actual application of the atonement made on the cross. That is why the heavenly work is called an "atonement." It is not another, but the completion or fulfilling of that which was begun at the cross. The text that best describes the ceremonial law being done away with is found in Ephesians. It reads.
"14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;" [Eph 2:14,15]
Concerning Col. 2:14, here are some comments by Wesely on this text. I think you will find them interesting:
"Having blotted out - in consequence of his gracious decrees, that Christ should come into the world to save sinners, and that whosoever believeth on him should have everlasting life. The handwriting against us - Where a debt is contracted, it is usually testified by some handwriting; and when the debt is forgiven, the handwriting is destroyed, either by blotting it out, by taking it away, or by tearing it. The apostle expresses in all these three ways, God's destroying the handwriting which was contrary to us, or at enmity with us. This was not properly our sins themselves, (they were the debt,) but their guilt and cry before God."
On page 112 the authors are again referring to the 1957 book Questions on Doctrine:
"The statement that 'all the sacrificial offerings, the feast days, and even the priesthood---all that was typical of the sacrifice and ministry of Christ our Lord---met its end on Calvary's cross' is problematic. For one thing, it contradicts Christ: 'For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.'" (Matt. 5:18, RSV).
The application of this text by the authors to the ceremonial laws is in complete and direct contradiction to the Spirit of Prophecy. Notice the following quote from Bible Echo:
"But Christ Himself declares that He came not to destroy the law of ten precepts, which was spoken from Sinai. He says, 'Verily I say unto you,' -making the assertion as emphatic as possible, --'Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled.' Here He teaches not merely what the claims of God's law had been and were then, but that these claims should forever settle the question. The law of God is as immutable as His throne. It will maintain its claims upon all mankind in all ages, unchanged by time or place or circumstances. The ritual system was of altogether a different character, and typified the death of Christ as a sacrifice for the broken precepts of the moral law." E.G. White, Bible Echo, April 16, 1894, par. 3.
Just a note on Mattew 5:17. "Think not that I have come to destroy the law or prophets..." The terminology here, "law and the prophets" is reference to Holy Scripture. Today we would say, "Think not that I have come to destroy the Bible."Jesus' emphasis in verse 19 not only includes the moral law, but the whole law of Moses. His emphasis here was to turn the people from the manmade traditional teachings of the Pharisees back to the Bible. He wasn't leading "from" Scripture as some feared, but back to it!
On page 113 the authors are again referring to the 1957 book Questions on Doctrine:
"Questions on Doctrine is not especially helpful in its use of such texts as Colossians 2:14 to describe the ceremonial law. The ceremonies were not 'against us.' To the contrary, they were a shadow of God's grace. Every time a lamb died it pointed forward to Christ who would die for the sins of the world. The ceremonial system was a foreshadowing of the gospel. In actuality, it was the record of sin that was nailed to the cross."
The above statement is astounding in its ramifications. They are saying the ceremonial law could not have been nailed to the cross because it was a shadow of the gospel. This is a direct contradiction of scripture because Colossians 2:17 states that what was nailed to the cross was a shadow. In addition, they are clearly stating that "the record of sin" was nailed to the cross. However, we find the following inspired statement:
"In the great day of final award, the dead are to be 'judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their words.' Revelation 20:12. then by virtue of the atoning blood of Christ, the sins of all the truly penitent will be blotted from the books of heaven. Thus the sanctuary will be freed, or cleansed, from the record of sin. In the type, this great work of atonement, or blotting out of sins, was represented by the services of the Day of Atonement---the cleansing of the earthly sanctuary, which was accomplished by the removal, by virtue of the blood of the sin offering, of the sins by which it had been polluted. As in the final atonement the sins of the truly penitent are to be blotted from the records of heaven, no more to be remembered or come into mind, so in the type they were borne away into the wilderness, forever separated from the congregation." Patriarchs & Prophets, pg. 357, 358.
The move from "record of sin" here to mean "ten commandments" and lay that charge at Knights feet is not tenable but rather an unscholarly attempt to over simplify the issues. It creates a strawman, even if that is not intended. Let Knight speak for himself and be careful in what we charge him with. As I've said, I know that he believes the law is eternal . See page 26 of My Gripe with God, (RH-1990) as just one quick example. I cannot hang with your charges here and consider the charges nefarious. While the law condems, it does so because the record of our deeds stand against us. If they have already been paid by the substitutionary death of Christ, I stand in the judgment "not guilty." See on Zech 3ff and Matt 22ff for how we win in the judgment.
Even if Knight meant that only the record of our deeds was nailed to the cross, he is still errant in light of the following paragraph. He is also errant in saying that it was not the ceremonial as contained in handwritten ordinances that was nailed to the cross. That is a direct contradiction of Holy Writ.
Karl implies that our record of sins has been paid by the substitutionary death of Christ, so we stand not guilty. We may stand not guilty if we are in a saved relationship with Christ, but Karl errs by implying that the record of sin was nailed to the cross. Notice:
Inspiration declares that "the record of sin" was not cleansed, removed, or nailed to the cross. It must remain until the antitypical Day of Atonement. What the authors of the New Annotated Edition of Questions on Doctrine are teaching is the evangelical theology that the atonement was completed at the cross and that there is no work in heaven that Christ must do in our behalf. This is a denial of Adventism.
Please notice that the authors are mixing up their use of "record of sin" and "record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. The "record of sin" is the record of our sins that if confessed and forsaken, will be blotted out from the records in heaven before Christ comes for His people.
The record of sin does not, indeed cannot, condemn. It is the law that condemns. The record is merely a passive instrument of testimony of our words and actions. It is this record of sin that we will face in the judgment. If the record was nailed to the cross, as the authors claim, there could not be a future judgment.
In the following quote from the 2003 New Annotated Edition of Questions on Doctrine, when the authors claim that it was not the ceremonial law that was nailed to the cross, they are using the English Standard Version, published in 2110 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. This is an adulterated rendition of Rome and Apostate Protestants who have colored what is written with their thoughts and present it as God's word. Therefore, when one reads Colossians 2:13, 14, in the ESV about "the record of debt", and "with its legal demands," the conclusion is quite clear that they are referring to the law of God---the Ten Commandments---being nailed to the cross. Look in your King James Bible and check it out for yourself.
The very comments above denote a King James only mentality. This is interesting, for those I meet who believe that the King James is the only truly God inspired English translation, I point out that they have just done what the Roman Catholics have done. Created their own "Latin Vulgate." In doing so, even the Hebrew and Greek mss are now subject to interpretation based on the King James. Aside from this, Knight has written that the ESV gives a better rendition. Not because he has intrinsically attached to this translation the attributes of correctness, but because Knight has gone to the Greek and so points out the fact that the ESV is more correct, so he uses it. He points out that what was nailed to the cross was our sins.
The authors go on to say the following:
The English Standard Version puts it correctly when it notes that "God made [us] alive together with him, having forgiven all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross." (Col. 2:13, 14, ESV).
What has legal demands?
"The law demands righteousness, and this the sinner owes to the law;..." Faith & Works, pg. 101.
"Many in the Christian world also have a veil before their eyes and heart. They do not see to the end of that which was done away. They do not see that it was only the ceremonial law which was abrogated at the death of Christ. They claim that the moral law was nailed to the cross. Heavy is the veil that darkens their understanding. The hearts of many are at war with God. They are not subject to His law." Review & Herald, April 22, 1902, par. 15.
The authors go on to say:
"As noted above, the main purpose of the ceremonial law did not end at Calvary. Beyond that, the handwriting of the ordinances that was against us was not the ceremonial law (a type of grace) but rather the record which brought condemnation of the broken moral law."
The practice of the ceremonial law may have ended, but their purpose still finds fulfillment in the current work of Christ. In that, they did not meet their "end." We have moved from type and Symbol to the real. That is, not all ceremonial types have been fulfilled. We are still now in the Anti-typical day of Atonement and awaiting the festival of booths. But rather than look to an earthly system, today we look to Christ. To conclude that Knight suggests the demise of the ten commandments cannot be concluded here.
Ron Beaulieu Commentary on Karl's above statement that the demise of the ten commandments cannot be concluded here: Karl and readers at large, either the ceremonial law or the ten-commandment law was nailed to the cross. God says that it was the ceremonial law or law contained in ordinances. If Knight concluded in his above statement that it was not the ceremonial law that was against us and that the ceremonial law did not end at calvary by being nailed to the cross, that leave only one other law as nailed to the cross--the moral ten commandment law! Look at the context of collosians 2:14
The handwriting of ordinances is clearly associated with ordinances such as meat, drink, various holy days included in the ceremonial laws etc., etc. There were many holy sabbaths other than the seventh-day sabbath of the decalogue.
And what was against the Jews in connection with the ceremonial laws? I guess if one had to sacrifice his best of herd every time he/she sinned, one would quickly would think that such a law requiring such sacrifice was against one.
Clearly, if the law that was against the Jews of the day was"rather the record which brought condemnation of the broken moral law," and the law that was against them was nailed to the cross, Knight clearly implies that it was the moral law that was nailed to the cross. He flat out stated that it was not the ceremonial law that was nailed to the cross! Karl refuses to deal with this problem. He steers clear of this problem with Knight's wording. He apparently feels no burden to defend inspiration and Scripture which both state that it was the ceremonial law that was nailed to the cross.
This is a most amazing declaration. The unmistakable implication or conclusion to be drawn here is that it was the Ten Commandments that were nailed to the cross. This is because first they state that "the handwriting of the ordinances that was against us was not the ceremonial law" in direct contradiction of inspiration.
Next they declare that the handwriting of ordinances was instead "the record which brought condemnation of the broken moral law." We must ask, what was the record that "brought condemnation" because of the "broken moral law?" we must let Scripture answer this question for us. Romans 7:7 gives us the answer:
"What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet."
Thus the Bible teaches that it is the law itself that brings condemnation when we have broken that very law. The Ten Commandments tell us what God's will is; they are the standard of judgment, thereby making known to us when we have stepped out of the will of God and Broken His law. However, the authors turn this on its head and imply that the Ten Commandments are the "handwriting of ordinances that was against us," which Colossians 2:14 says was taken out of the way and nailed to the cross. They are boldly declaring that the Ten Commandments were nailed to the cross and are therefore no longer binding upon us. However, if the ten precepts were nailed to the cross, and "sin is the transgression of the law," then anyone born on this side of the cross has not sinned because sin is breaking the law that was taken out of the way and nailed to the cross. Then, if we have not sinned, we do not need a Saviour, and if we do not need a Saviour then we do not need Jesus. Removing the distinction between the ceremonial and moral laws is devastating and far reaching in its results as we have seen.
If not "boldly declaring" that the Ten Commandments were nailed to the cross, they certainly leave no other option after stating that it is not the ceremonial laws that were so nailed! Nailing a record of our sins to the cross would not nail the moral law to the cross. But a law was nailed to the cross. If it was not the handwriting of ordinances consisting of the ceremonial laws, then it would of necessity have to be the decalogue.
Thus in Patriarchs and Prophets, page 365, we read the following:
"There are many who try to blend these two 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 the law that Christ 'took...out of the way, nailing it to His cross.' Colossians 2:14. But concerning the law of Ten Commandments the psalmist declares, 'Forever, O Lord, Thy word is settled in heaven.' Psalm 119:89. And Christ Himself says, 'Think not that I am come to destroy the law.... Verily I say unto you' -making the assertion as emphatic as possible-'Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till ass be fulfilled.' Matthew 5:17, 18. Here He teaches not merely what the claims of God's law had been, and were then, but that these claims should hold as long as the heavens and the earth remain. The law of God is as immutable as His throne. It will maintain its claims upon mankind in all ages." Patriarchs & Prophets, pg. 365.
In Bible Echo, Ellen White says:
"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 to take away the sin of the world. Then all the sacrificial offerings and services were to be abolished. Paul and the other apostles laboured to show this, and resolutely withstood those Judaizing teachers who declared that Christians ought to observe the ceremonial law." Bible Echo, April 16, 1894, par. 2.
Brothers and sisters the Ten Commandments were not nailed to the cross!
"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." Signs of the Times, March 12, 1896 par. 3.
"And the evil that existed in the Jewish nation is apparent today. The salt has lost its savor. The very ones who condemn and despise the Jewish nation because they refused to see in Christ all the specifications of prophecy, are in a similar deception. They have nailed to the cross the law of God, which made a necessity the gift of God's Son to the world. They have crucified the law of God, the foundation of His government in heaven and in earth. But all who thus claim to accept Christ and yet refuse to obey the law which Christ came to vindicate, place themselves in a position similar to that of the man who began to build, and was not able to finish. Mrs. E. G. White" Signs of the Times, July 28, 1898 par. 12.
Commentary by Ron Beaulieu:
Truly, professing New Movement Adventism, intentionally or unintentionally, has returned to the iniquities of our forefathers, Jeremiah 11:9-15, so that verse 15 is AT THIS TIME totally apropos for any sincere Seventh-day Adventist. We have returned to their iniquitous doctrines and practices via ecumenical fraternity; a teaching curriculum that agrees to teach according to the accreditation standards of the world, thus marrying the church to the world via its educational institutions, and licentious practices such as unlawful intimacies related to illegal marriages condoned by the church. Now the leaders are countermanding Scripture to say that it was not the law as contained in ordinances that was nailed to the cross. Even if George Knight did not mean that the decalogue was nailed to the cross, that would mean that nothing was nailed to the cross--in contravention of Scripture!
Karl Wagner has surely once again shown his penchant for defending those in error by trying to deflect from the errors. He does not once mention the obvious errors of Knight. Though there are still types of the ceremonial law to be fulfilled, that does not mean that God was errant in saying that certains aspects of it regarding meat, drink, the sacrificing of animals for sins committed, and the keeping high holy sabbath days was nailed to the cross.
If George Knight is such a watchman who does not understand what he has done (Isaiah 56:10-12), by way of a teaching that implies a nailing of the Ten Commandments to the cross or that nothing was nailed to the cross, and an annulling of the intercessory atonement work in the Sanctuary presently, what does that say of the rest of the highest echelon leaders who have condoned his book and sell it? Isaiah 56:10-12 is so true and apropos now. Ellen White reapplies it in Testimonies, Vol. 5, 211, referring to the dumb dogs who will not bark the truth, showing the House of Jacob its sins. Now they have done away with the only standard that defines sin.
Keep in mind that Ellen White says:
"The intercession of Christ in man's behalf in the sanctuary above is as essential to the plan of salvation as was His death upon the cross. By His death He began that work which after His resurrection He ascended to complete in heaven. We must by faith enter within the veil, 'whither the forefunner is for us entered.' Hebrews 6:20:" E.G. White, The Great Controversy, 1911 edition, p. 489.
M.L. Andreasen's prime criticism of the 1957 Answers to Question on Doctrine book was that it did away with Christ's Atoning work in the Sanctuary after the cross. So the new doctrinal book of New Movement Adventism, still does away with the intercession of Christ in the Sanctuary above, which is AS ESSENTIAL to the plan of salvation as was His death upon the cross? Why is that work just as essential? Because it invovles the other half of the gospel--that of regenerating sinful humans back into the image of God by proffering the Divine Nature of Christ and His Holy Spirit to effect this end of overcoming sin and resulting in character development.
The new Adventist doctrinal book also does away with the investigative judgment, because if there is no law, there is no sin and nothing to investigate, because no judge would condemn a person without his/her breaking a pre-stated law. Neither God, nor civil man, imposes or imputes judgment without a pre-warning code, and God's code, based on His character of self-sacrificing love, is His Ten-Commandment Law.
What could New Movement Adventism do that is more blasphemous than removing the Holy, Perfect Law of God? That is akin to "removing God," Selected Messages, Book 1, 205, because His law is a transcript of His character. This is the legacy of Omega of Apostacy, New Movement Adventism which Vance Ferrell admonishes us to remain a member of and support with the sacred tithe and offerings, althewhile maintaining that he could not remain a minister of the denomination and abide by principle!
Notice the additional importance the Bible attributes to the law:
"And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? None is good save one, that is, God" (Luke 18:19).
"But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully" (1 Timothy 1:8).
"But the LORD of hosts shall be exalted in judgment, and God that is holy shall be sanctified in righteousness" (Isaiah 5:16).
"Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good" (Romans 7:12).
"Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect" (Matthew 5:48).
"The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul:..." (Psalm 19:7).
"Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And every man that has this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure" ((1John 3:2,3).
"The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes" (Psalm 19:8).
"He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgement: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he" (Deut. 32:4).
"Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good" (Romans 7:12).
"He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true" (John 3:33).
The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgements of the LORD are true and righteous altogether" (Psalm 19:9).
"And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of the spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ" (1 Cor. 10:4).
"For we know that the law is spiritual..." (Romans 7:14).
"In his days Judah shall be saved and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS" (Jeremiah 23:6).
"My tongue shall speak of thy word: for all thy commandments are righteousness" Psalm 119:172).
"God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord" (1 Cor. 1:9).
"All thy commandments are faithful..." (Psalm 119:86).
"He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love" (1 John 4:8).
"Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law" (Romans 13:10).
"Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning" (James 1:17).
"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matthew 5:18).
"And Abraham planted a grove in Beer-sheeba, and called there on the name of the LORD, the everlasting God" (Genesis 21:33).
"The works of his hands are verity and judgement; all his commandments are sure. They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness" (Psalm 111:7,8).