Sanctuary

[Lysimachus]

Seriously Dr. Rich? Adventists do not believe Paul's words are 100% inspired?

You want to make us think this is the case because you feel Paul says things that are contrary to our beliefs.

It's more like we do not falsely interpret his writings like you do.

Peter said Paul says some things hard to understand.

This means you may very well be misinterpreting Paul. And because you are incapable of harmonizing his words with the rest of Scripture, you end up dismissing them as being inspired instead of praying to God for wisdom and understanding in knowing how to properly harmonize them.

[Dr. Rich]

Ok, then tell me this, what Paul said in Gal. 1:11-12 is true or is Acts 9:20-28 true? Which one do you believe was true?

[ClubV12]

Some professed Adventists teach doctrine that is not in harmony with Seventh-day Adventist official doctrines and beliefs, like Dr.Rich. Who makes no apology for teaching that which is opposed by the Adventist Church, no doubt he is very sincere.... ly mistaken.

Of more concern are those who are teaching error that is SO close to the truth it becomes exceedingly difficult to spot the error. The history of the Adventist Church shows this happening about every or every other decade or so. Dr. Kellogg is perhaps the most well known. Dr. Ford more recently. Kelloggs deception was so powerful Sister White counseled against even reading his book.... at all! Sound advice for any theory or theology that attempts to move the pillars of our faith. Following the Lords messengers' advice, I personally have no interest in studying Dr.Richs' theology..... at all.

[Guest]

Many Adventists don't believe that Paul was God's true apostle

What do you call many....three? I only know three, and they all three live in the same spot on the planet. Must be something in the water there.

[Dr. Rich]

Marcos wrote: "Peter said Paul says some things hard to understand." Do you realize that IF Peter wrote this, Peter had not read everything that Paul had written. But of course you take it by fiath, and therefore you can't be moved by facts.

[Guest]

Ok, then tell me this, what Paul said in Gal. 1:11-12 is true or is Acts 9:20-28 true? Which one do you believe was true?

It should be obvious to any 2 month Bible student, or above, that they are both true.

[Dr. Rich]

Originally Posted By: Dr. Rich

Many Adventists don't believe that Paul was God's true apostle

What do you call many....three? I only know three, and they all three live in the same spot on the planet. Must be something in the water there.

Richard, when you are in church do you make the women remain quiet? How do you do this? Isn't this what Paul said? 1Tim. 2:11-12

Do you believe that Paul had to suffer more because the suffering Christ did was lacking (didn't suffer enough)? Do you?

[Gail]

I'm not sure the way things are going on here is the answer our OP starter was looking for...

[whatisthis]

In the typical service, when the work of atonement was performed by the high priest in the most holy place of the earthly sanctuary, the people were required to afflict their souls before God, and confess their sins, that they might be atoned for and blotted out. Will any less be required of us in this antitypical day of atonement, when Christ in the Sanctuary above is pleading in behalf of his people, and the final, irrevocable decision is to be pronounced upon every case?

What is our condition in this fearful and solemn time? Alas, what pride is prevailing in the church, what hypocrisy, what deception, what love of dress, frivolity, and amusement, what desire for the supremacy! All these sins have clouded the mind, so that eternal things have not been discerned..

This quote seems to me to go with that one:

"God's plan is not to send messengers who will please and flatter sinners; He delivers no messages of peace to lull the unsanctified into carnal security. Instead , He lays heavy burdens upon the conscience of the wrongdoer and pierces his soul with sharp arrows of conviction . . . to prompt the cry, "What must I do to be saved!" (Acts 16:30) But the Hand that humbles to the dust, rebukes sin, and puts pride and ambition to shame, is the hand that lifts up the penitent stricken one. With deepest sympathy He who permits the chastisement to fall, inquires, "What wilt thou that I shall do unto thee?" Prophets and Kings p. 435

That phrase, "What wilt thou that I shall do unto thee?" was what Jesus asked a paralyzed man. What the paralyzed man did when Jesus bent over him asking was to ask Jesus for help. And when he asked, Jesus let him get up and skip off carrying a burden he'd been given the strength to easily carry-- one he was imprisoned upon till that very moment!

[whatisthis]

It looks to me like I've answered in the wrong place in this thread, but it's pretty exciting that Jesus brings conviction only to bring release. We are in a time we tend to fear, the time of the judgment, but is it really a fearful time or a time that leads us to look up to Jesus and find Him saying "What do you want me to do for you."

[Gibs]

The Sanctuary is a great pillar of the SDAdventist faith, EGW speaks,

Chap. 23 - What is the Sanctuary?

"The scripture which above all others had been both the foundation and the central pillar of the advent faith was the declaration: "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." Daniel 8:14. These had been familiar words to all believers in the Lord's soon coming. By the lips of thousands was this prophecy repeated as the watchword of their faith. All felt that upon the events therein foretold depended their brightest expectations and most cherished hopes. These prophetic days had been shown to terminate in the autumn of 1844. In common with the rest of the Christian world, Adventists then held that the earth, or some portion of it, was the sanctuary. They understood that the cleansing of the sanctuary was the purification of the earth by the fires of the last great day, and that this would take place at the second advent. Hence the conclusion that Christ would return to the earth in 1844. {GC 409.1}

But the appointed time had passed, and the Lord had not appeared. The believers knew that God's word could not fail; their interpretation of the prophecy must be at fault; but where was the mistake? Many rashly cut the knot of difficulty by denying that the 2300 days ended in 1844. No reason could be given for this except that Christ had not come at the time they expected Him. They argued that if the prophetic days had ended in 1844, Christ would then have returned to cleanse the sanctuary by the purification of the earth by fire; and that since He had not come, the days could not have ended. {GC 409.2}

To accept this conclusion was to renounce the former reckoning of the prophetic periods. The 2300 days had been found to begin when the commandment of Artaxerxes for the restoration and building of Jerusalem went into effect, in the autumn of 457 B.C. Taking this as the starting point, there was perfect harmony in the application of all the events foretold in the explanation of that period in Daniel 9:25-27. Sixty-nine weeks, the first 483 of the 2300 years, were to reach to the Messiah, the Anointed One; and Christ's baptism and anointing by the Holy Spirit, A.D. 27, exactly fulfilled the specification. In the midst of the seventieth week, Messiah was to be cut off. Three and a half years after His baptism, Christ was crucified, in the spring of A.D. 31. The seventy weeks, or 490 years, were to pertain especially to the Jews. At the expiration of this period the nation sealed its rejection of Christ by the persecution of His disciples, and the apostles turned to the Gentiles, A.D. 34. The first 490 years of the 2300 having then ended, 1810 years would remain. From A.D. 34, 1810 years extend to 1844. "Then," said the angel, "shall the sanctuary be cleansed." All the preceding specifications of the prophecy had been unquestionably fulfilled at the time appointed. {GC 410.1}

With this reckoning, all was clear and harmonious, except that it was not seen that any event answering to the cleansing of the sanctuary had taken place in 1844. To deny that the days ended at that time was to involve the whole question in confusion, and to renounce positions which had been established by unmistakable fulfillments of prophecy. {GC 410.2}

The command to start the prophecy for these 2300 days/years is

Da 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

To see this you must have caught earlier that these 70 weeks are "cut off" determined the scripture says in english, read,

Da 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

We thus find the 2300 and the 70 weeks, 490 days start at the same time, BC 457.

It is absolutely true and cannot be moved, this prophecy is proved in the fulfillment of JESUS's crucifiction on the cross the middle of that 70'th week.

Blessings to all who fully understand it, your faith is increased greatly.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[wayfinder]

In order to understand the Sanctuary, we must first know what was/is it's purpose and function.

Exodus 25:8 "Let them construct a sanctuary for Me, that I may dwell among them. 9 "According to all that I am going to show you, as the pattern of the tabernacle and the pattern of all its furniture, just so you shall construct it.

Revelation 11:19 NAS

And the temple of God which is in heaven was opened ; and the ark of His covenant appeared in His temple, and there were flashes of lightning and sounds and peals of thunder and an earthquake and a great hailstorm.

The "pattern" of the tabernacle was a copy of the temple in the heavens, where God dwells. The furniture in the temple/Sanctuary was also the same pattern as in the heavens. The function and purpose was the same for both. The outter court, with the Laver and Altar was not a pattern of that in heaven, the Laver and Altar are not in heaven.The Sanctuary operates on behalf of the kingdom of God. It is a house of prayer for all who choose to worship the true God. It is where the forgiven sins of the kingdom of God are placed. It is where the High Priest officiates on behalf of the kingdom of God. It stands to reason, if God does not have a kingdom on earth (in the world, but not of the world) then the Sanctuary is not in operation. God did not give Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob the plans for the "earthly" Sanctuary, because the were not the kingdom; but is was through them that the kingdom would come.God gave the plans to Moses, because he was the leader of God's kingdom.

In 30BCE God announced to the leaders of the kingdom, that the kingdom of God would be taken away from them and given to another people, who would produce the fruit required. This new kingdom was born at the end of the 2300 evenings and mornings.

From the time that the house of Israel lost their connection with God, as His kingdom, until the appearance of the "new" kingdom there was no kingdom of God on earth, for the Sanctuary to operate on behalf of. The Sanctuary on earth was forever gone. The Sanctuary on heaven was not in operation. With the coming of the kingdom of the heavens in 1844, the Sanctuary in heaven now had a kingdom and began operation or, "was put back in it's original condition". The operation of the Sanctuary in heaven was restored, and has been in operation ever since.The Sanctuary in heaven will operate until the censer is cast down. At that time the door to the kingdom will be shut (Matthew 25:10).

[tall73]

Jesus sitting down at the right hand of the father somehow negates the IJ?

How so?

Perhaps because by the time He sat down He had already made the purification for sins:

Heb 1:3 b After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high

And because Hebrews describes the entry and presentation before God in Day of Atonement language, in the context of the cleansing of the heavenly things.

Heb 9:23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

Heb 9:24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.

Heb 9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own

Jesus entry and presentation is compared to the yearly entry of the high priest with blood on the Day of Atonement. This is in the context of the cleansing of the heavenly things.

The Day of Atonement cleansing that happened in the type was a cleansing application of blood for all the sins of the whole camp.

Jesus fulfilled that.

He

- made the once for all sacrifice

- entered

- presented Himself, in comparison to the high priest on the Day of Atonement.

And the Scriptures tell us that He made purification for sins.

He already made the corporate cleansing by blood, which is what happened in the sanctuary on the Day of Atonement.

Now folks accept it or not.

[tall73]

And surely I believe Jesus did sit on a literal seat as well for the coronation, but that doesn't mean that He didn't get up and walk around after. Or are you suggesting He's been glued to His chair for 2000 years?

Ridiculous!

Jesus commences His First Apartment ministration after the coronation. It doesn't mean He was always literally walking and standing ONLY in the Holy Place, but His ministration was a Holy Place ministration.

Same in 1844 for the Most Holy Place.

Jesus literally stepped into the Most Holy Place in 1844 to commence a work of Investigative Judgment. But that does not mean that He literally got stuck in that room since 1844. It just

means that SINCE 1844, HIS WORK HAS BEEN A MOST HOLY PLACE MINISTRATION--REGARDLESS OF HIS PHYSICAL LOCATION.

Now, now, I don't think Rich was indicating Jesus was glued to a chair. But you can hardly blame him for the heavenly geography focus that Adventists themselves started when for years they focused on apartments, rather than just ministries.

But Rich's point remains. Hebrews DOES talk about not just location, but about ministries.

Heb 9:23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

Heb 9:24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.

Heb 9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own

Heb 1:3 b After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high

[tall73]

Of more concern are those who are teaching error that is SO close to the truth it becomes exceedingly difficult to spot the error. The history of the Adventist Church shows this happening about every or every other decade or so. Dr. Kellogg is perhaps the most well known. Dr. Ford more recently. Kelloggs deception was so powerful Sister White counseled against even reading his book.... at all! Sound advice for any theory or theology that attempts to move the pillars of our faith. Following the Lords messengers' advice, I personally have no interest in studying Dr.Richs' theology..... at all.

Yes, she did the same thing during the Ballenger crisis.

We are not to receive the words of those who come with a message that contradicts the special points of our faith. They gather together a mass of Scripture, and pile it as proof around their asserted theories. This has been done over and over again during the past fifty years. And while the Scriptures are God's word, and are to be respected, the application of them, if such application moves one pillar from the foundation that God has sustained these fifty years, is a great mistake. He who makes such an application knows not the wonderful demonstration of the Holy Spirit that gave power and force to the past messages that have come to the people of God. {1SM 161.2}

She refused to show where Ballenger was wrong, and instead said that even if people present Scripture it should not be entertained if they do not agree with Adventist doctrine.

She said it couldn't be true, because their EXPERIENCE showed they were right.

Thereby she put her experience above the Bible.

[tall73]

Jesus sitting down at the right hand of the father somehow negates the IJ?

How so?

Because the sitting down of Jesus was at the right hand of God on the throne. And the consistent place of God's immediate presence (though His presence was throughout the sanctuary and even in the camp), was above the mercy seat.

This was true in the yearly AND the daily services.

God was in the Most Holy Place.

Lev 16:2 and the LORD said to Moses, "Tell Aaron your brother not to come at any time into the Holy Place inside the veil, before the mercy seat that is on the ark, so that he may not die. For I will appear in the cloud over the mercy seat.

And Jesus didn't just show up and then depart from there. But from the first century on we could come boldly to Him there at the throne of grace in the heavenly.

Heb 4:14 Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession.

Heb 4:15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.

Heb 4:16 Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.

Jesus completed His blood work already, and now applies the benefits to those who approach in real time.

In the earthly the high priest could only go in with blood, and incense for a time and then left. Jesus stayed and granted us access now too.

Moreover, the author of Hebrews attaches further significance to the sitting down.

It is contrasted with the constant standing of the priest to offer.

Heb 10:11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.

Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,

Heb 10:13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet.

Heb 10:14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.

The priests could not sit down because they continually had to offer new sacrifices, which could never truly take away sin. But Jesus did present His one sacrifice then sat down. The blood work was over.

Notice that by a single offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.

Again, the corporate act of cleansing is done.

Folks now receive it in real time.

[ClubV12]

I'm very glad to see Tall73 is honest about where he stands, former Seventh-day Adventist. I really do appreciate that Tall.

As to your take on Ellen Whites experience with the pillars of the faith, I understand that because I have experienced the same thing. Tested these doctrines, searched them out, put them into practice in my life. In my experience, they hold true, continue to stand and will stand the test of time.

[phkrause]

I'm not sure the way things are going on here is the answer our OP starter was looking for...

exactly Gail, some are just interested in saying a few are correct, while so many through the years are wrong.

[Dr. Rich]

Why? Are you prejudice? The whole Sanctuary service was to be like a picture to what will happen at the end of earth's history. Rev. 11:1-2 is critical for this understanding. One must first take Sanctuary 101 before moving on. Only then will you be able to see WHY it was so important for God that things and timing were so critical.

No, the Atonement was not the same as the Passover, and for good reason.

[tall73]

SD:

God would appear in a cloud over the mercy seat.

[tall73]

Originally Posted By: Gail

I'm not sure the way things are going on here is the answer our OP starter was looking for...

exactly Gail, some are just interested in saying a few are correct, while so many through the years are wrong.

You mean like the Adventists being the only ones who hold to this sanctuary doctrine among all the Billions of Christians who have lived throughout time, and even then many Adventists don't believe it?

Yes, there are few who believe it.

[tall73]

I'm very glad to see Tall73 is honest about where he stands, former Seventh-day Adventist. I really do appreciate that Tall.

Sure. I do not teach Adventist doctrine or I would have remained an Adventist.

We agree on that point.

[tall73]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

At His ascension Jesus entered the Holy Place of the sanctuary above to begin His work of intercession. He ascended up on High to begin the work of atonement. In 1844 He passed from the Holy to the Most Holy Place.

Could you elaborate on the following statement please?

Christ’s glory did not appear when He was upon this earth. He was then a Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. Men hid their faces from Him. But He was following the path God had marked out for Him. Still bearing humanity, He ascended to heaven, triumphant and victorious. He has taken the blood of the atonement into the holiest of all, sprinkled it upon the mercy-seat and His own garments, and blessed the people. Soon He will appear the second time to declare that there is no more sacrifice for sin. {ST April 19, 1905, par. 4}

When do you see these events happening?

I am still waiting for someone to take this on.

This has been an important quote historically in the debate. I have some notions of what it could mean. Perhaps some of you do as well.

[cheddar]

If Jesus went directly to the most holy place phase when he went to heaven it would not be consistent and accurate with the Jewish feasts that went along with the sanctuary service.

The spring feasts pointed forward to the 1st coming and the day of Pentecost so it would stand to reason that the fall feasts would be pointing forward to the 2nd coming.

We have:

the feast of trumpets (warning the Israelites to get ready for the great day of judgment)

the day of atonement (the great day of judgment)

and the feast of tabernacles (living in outdoor shelters to commemorate God’s care)

With this template we should expect to find the antitypical day of atonement somewhere between the 7th trumpet of Rev. (not the historical version) and the time of trouble. The fact that the feast of trumpets points to the trumpets in Rev. is fairly obvious but connecting the feast of tabernacles with the time of trouble is a little harder. This is one verse that I found:

Quote:

For in the time of trouble he shall hide me in his pavilion: in the secret of his tabernacle shall he hide me; he shall set me up upon a rock. Ps. 27:5

Jesus also commands his followers to flee into the wilderness just before the time of trouble (great tribulation) which is another connection to the feast of tabernacles.

We should also keep in mind that Paul and the early Christians believed that Christ could come in their day so they may not have had all the light on this.

[tall73]

If Jesus went directly to the most holy place phase when he went to heaven it would not be consistent and accurate with the Jewish feasts that went along with the sanctuary service.

The spring feasts pointed forward to the 1st coming and the day of Pentecost so it would stand to reason that the fall feasts would be pointing forward to the 2nd coming.

We have:

the feast of trumpets (warning the Israelites to get ready for the great day of judgment)

the day of atonement (the great day of judgment)

and the feast of tabernacles (living in outdoor shelters to commemorate God’s care)

With this template we should expect to find the antitypical day of atonement somewhere between the 7th trumpet of Rev. (not the historical version) and the time of trouble. The fact that the feast of trumpets points to the trumpets in Rev. is fairly obvious but connecting the feast of tabernacles with the time of trouble is a little harder. This is one verse that I found:

Quote:

For in the time of trouble he shall hide me in his pavilion: in the secret of his tabernacle shall he hide me; he shall set me up upon a rock. Ps. 27:5

Jesus also commands his followers to flee into the wilderness just before the time of trouble (great tribulation) which is another connection to the feast of tabernacles.

We should also keep in mind that Paul and the early Christians believed that Christ could come in their day so they may not have had all the light on this.

A. I still see aspects of the Day of Atonement that would be fulfilled in their time. For instance, the scapegoat portion happened after the priest left the sanctuary, and assumedly would still happen as you outlined.

B. However, certain aspects of the plan of salvation in the fulfillment were once for all historical acts. They are not going to be repeated later.

So in the type there were many sacrifices, at different times throughout the year. But in the fulfillment we have only one, once for all sacrifice. And this happened historically in the first century.

So all agree the sacrifice for the Day of Atonement happened in the first century.

And the entry into the sanctuary was part of the Day of Atonement (multiple actually), but all the entries with blood were also fulfilled with one culticly significant once for all entry in the first century.

Heb 9:11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation)

Heb 9:12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.

So the entry into the sanctuary with blood that took place during the inauguration, and with the sin of the whole camp or annointed priest, or the Day of Atonement, were all fulfilled in this one, once for all entry.

Again, it does not match the type which had various entries. But it does surpass it, and is once for all. It is described as past tense in the view of the author of Hebrews in the first century.

So then not only the sacrifice but the entry happened in the first century.

And Hebrews spells out that the cleansing of the heavenly things happened. And it spells out that the purification for sins was done.

Now you can say it doesn't fit the type. But which is the true, and which the illustration?

If you admit the sacrifice was once for all, and that the sacrifice for the Day of Atonement happened in the first century, then you already have a precedent for this.

And this is what the text describes.

Beyond that, there is a reason for it. In the earthly at the end of the year the whole camp would participate in the Day of Atonement and accept the provision made for them.

But in order for all Christians to accept this, it would have to be done at the beginning of the Christian era.

And that is the only time the once for all death, once for all entry, and cleansing of the heavenly things happened.

It is an historical reality that gave boldness to the first century believers to come to the throne of grace to receive what had already been done for them.

So the portion that related to the presentation in the presence of God to present His sacrifice, that happened in the first century when Christ made purification. That was the cleansing IN the sanctuary--the cleansing of sins of the whole camp through blood.

The events after the priest leaves the sanctuary would still be to follow.