tall73 Posted November 22, 2009 Posted November 22, 2009 On the contrary -- the text states that the presentation of Christ as an "unblemished sacrifice" (hint the animal was checked for blemish -- blood was never checked for "blemish") was completed long ago at the cross. Exactly! the blood is never examined in the type, but it cleanses. Hence the problem with the IJ being based on the type of cleansing in the sanctuary. In the type the blood is applied for cleansing. In Ellen White's fulfillment though there is investigation, and books, etc. That is not what the type pictures as going on in the sanctuary cleansing that happened in the temple. Again you refute Ellen White. The type was death entry purification for sins. Jesus fulfilled that, once for all death once for all entry purification for sins, as seen in Heb. 1:3, which plainly states He made purification for sins then sat down. Quote Former Seventh-day Adventist
tall73 Posted November 22, 2009 Posted November 22, 2009 Originally Posted By: Tall73 Here is another once for all text that will surprise some: Heb 10:10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. This is yet another key failing in your argument. It is the "body of Christ" that is offered on the cross "once for all" -- just one you wanted to insist that the offering was "in the sanctuary" and an "offering of blood" we find yet again that Christ is offerred on the cross. Because in the sanctuary his role is NOT as "LAMB" but as High Priest. The High Priest is not in the sanctuary to offer his body as a sacrifice. I have not argued that it all happens in the sanctuary Bob. The death is just as critical as the presentation in the sanctuary. But they were both necessary for a sacrifice. The argument in chapter 10 has again shifted gears. He is now talking about the inefficacy of animal sacrifice. Those sacrifices never took away sin. But the sacrifice of Jesus does. Moreover in chapter 10 we see a switch from clear Day of Atonement language in 9:23-25 (and some would say the first part of chapter 10, others would not) to now talking about all the sacrifices. It mentions not just the high priest but EVERY priest in verse 11 that is referenced. 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, This again demonstrates the need to examine each argument in a passage. Now, another instance where PROSFERW is used in Hebrews in a different fashion from "offer in sacrifice": Heb 12:7a It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is OFFERING YOU IN SACRIFICE as sons. That is clearly not what the text is talking about. But it is the same word, PROSFERW that is being used. Quote Former Seventh-day Adventist
tall73 Posted November 22, 2009 Posted November 22, 2009 (Oh and BTW - "will have been sanctified" refers to the future state of the saints who will have been sanctified through the benefits of the past tense once for all offering "of the body of Christ" on the cross.) That is not a correct rendering at all Bobl. It is not "will have been sanctified". It is by that WILL we HAVE been sanctified. Will is not indicating future action. It is referring to the WILL of God...His desire and sovereign choice. Heb 10:9 then he added, "Behold, I have come to do your will." He does away with the first in order to establish the second. Heb 10:10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Here is the word for will used: Strongs G2307 thelēma thel'-ay-mah A determination (properly the thing), that is, (actively) choice (specifically purpose, decree; abstractly volition) or (passively) inclination: - desire, pleasure, will. Now as to the timing of the sanctification it is ...we have been sanctified.... It actually readswe are having been sanctified Having been sanctified is in the perfect tense, action in the past with ongoing results. So it is not in the future. Nor is the following verse: Heb 10:14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. "has perfected" is in the perfect tense again showing completed action in the past with ongoing results. Quote Former Seventh-day Adventist
BobRyan Posted November 23, 2009 Posted November 23, 2009 Originally Posted By: BobRyan This is yet another key failing in your argument. It is the "body of Christ" that is offered on the cross "once for all" -- just one you wanted to insist that the offering was "in the sanctuary" and an "offering of blood" we find yet again that Christ is offerred on the cross. Because in the sanctuary his role is NOT as "LAMB" but as High Priest. The High Priest is not in the sanctuary to offer his body as a sacrifice. Originally Posted By: Tall73 I have not argued that it all happens in the sanctuary Bob. The death is just as critical as the presentation in the sanctuary. My point is that Christ's sacrifice "offered" is explicitly stated in reference to the cross in the book of Hebrews. Both views accept that sacrifice comes first. Both views accept that Christ had to go into the Sanctuary to minister the blood benefits. But in your view - the idea that "offer" is explicitly speaking of the Cross causes a problem for your "offered once means blood related ministry in the sanctury is ended" since in this case "offered once" only deals with the much-agreed upon one offering of Christ on the cross completed 2000 years ago. Quote: Moreover in chapter 10 we see a switch from clear Day of Atonement language in 9:23-25 (and some would say the first part of chapter 10' date=' others would not) to now talking about all the sacrifices. It mentions not just the high priest but EVERY priest in verse 11 that is referenced. Both views agree that ALL sacrifices of the types collapse into the ONE completed the sacrifice of the antitype. I don't know that this is helping any distinctive in your argument. Originally Posted By: Tall73 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, This again demonstrates the need to examine each argument in a passage. [/quote'] Both Heb 9 and 10 mention the daily sacrifices. in Christ, Bob Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
tall73 Posted November 23, 2009 Posted November 23, 2009 My point is that Christ's sacrifice "offered" is explicitly stated in reference to the cross in the book of Hebrews. Both views accept that sacrifice comes first. Both views accept that Christ had to go into the Sanctuary to minister the blood benefits. But in your view - the idea that "offer" is explicitly speaking of the Cross causes a problem for your "offered once means blood related ministry in the sanctury is ended" since in this case "offered once" only deals with the much-agreed upon one offering of Christ on the cross completed 2000 years ago. Originally Posted By: tall Moreover in chapter 10 we see a switch from clear Day of Atonement language in 9:23-25 (and some would say the first part of chapter 10, others would not) to now talking about all the sacrifices. It mentions not just the high priest but EVERY priest in verse 11 that is referenced. Both views agree that ALL sacrifices of the types collapse into the ONE completed the sacrifice of the antitype. I don't know that this is helping any distinctive in your argument. Bob, the fact that some verses refer to the offering on the cross does not change the fact that PROFERW in other contexts in Hebrews does NOT refer to the offering on the cross. Therefore each instance must be examined individually and contextually, looking at the argument in that section, to determine the meaning. The reason that it is important that chapter 10 is discussing the limitations of animals is that it shows the argument in that section--ie. it comprises the context. Now you claim that the word "offered" is stated in reference to the cross in Hebrews. Yes it is! it is also plainly stated in reference to prayers in Hebrews. And it is stated in reference presentation of blood. So one has to look at context to determine the meaning. Gotta run, Mormon missionaries are coming over to study. Quote Former Seventh-day Adventist
BobRyan Posted November 23, 2009 Posted November 23, 2009 Originally Posted By: BobRyan On the contrary -- the text states that the presentation of Christ as an "unblemished sacrifice" (hint the animal was checked for blemish -- blood was never checked for "blemish") was completed long ago at the cross. Exactly! the blood is never examined in the type, but it cleanses. Hence the problem with the IJ being based on the type of cleansing in the sanctuary. In the type the blood is applied for cleansing. In Ellen White's fulfillment though there is investigation, and books, etc. Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
BobRyan Posted November 23, 2009 Posted November 23, 2009 Originally Posted By: BobRyan No Bible translators insert the phrase "Nor yet did He enter in order to offer Himself" as you have done. NASB 25 nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. KJ21 25Nor yet should He offer Himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place with blood of others every year; YLT 25 nor that he may many times offer himself, even as the chief priest doth enter into the holy places every year with blood of others; Bob, I already posted versions that do add the word "enter", because they realize it is the thought of the author based on the text. The reason the texts above would not is because they are word-for-word translations and even if the structure demands the notion that this is in regards to entry they are not going to supply a word that is not there. Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
BobRyan Posted November 23, 2009 Posted November 23, 2009 No Bible translators insert the phrase "Nor yet did He enter in order to offer Himself" as you have done. NASB 25 nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. KJ21 25Nor yet should He offer Himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place with blood of others every year; YLT 25 nor that he may many times offer himself, even as the chief priest doth enter into the holy places every year with blood of others; ========================== Thus NASB 25 nor was it (INSERT: "in order that") He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. Does not help your argument for "Nor yet did He enter in order to offer Himself" Nor does YLT 25 nor (in order that) he may many times offer himself, even as the chief priest doth enter into the holy places every year with blood of others; Help your argument for "Nor yet did He enter in order to offer Himself" Nor do any of them render it as "Nor yet did He enter in order to offer Himself" Your only choice here is to argue that the best transalations are all wrong. That should tell you something. Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
BobRyan Posted November 23, 2009 Posted November 23, 2009 Originally Posted By: BobRyan What is most damaging to your argument is that in this case the author himself points the reader explicitly to the fact of the sacrifice once vs the sacrifice often -- never does the author argue that the sanctuary service has ended OR that Christ has even begun the Most Holy Place Day of Atonement segement of the Sanctuary service in heaven. His focus is entirely on the problem of "sacrifice" offerred up on the altar (suffering often) that would require entering the sanctuary often. ... The argument is... If A then B. But B is not true. If A IF Jesus were to present Himself often in God's presence in fulfillment of the blood rite the high priest did 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, Then B THEN Jesus would have to suffer often. You need the death to get the blood for presentation. Heb 9:26a for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
tall73 Posted November 23, 2009 Posted November 23, 2009 Point of Correction. 1. Ellen White is not the author of Daniel 7. There we see that it is the books of record that are used in judgment -- in the form of investigation. Quote Former Seventh-day Adventist
tall73 Posted November 23, 2009 Posted November 23, 2009 Nor was Christ's solution to offer himself repeatedly on the cross thereby providing many sacrifices as are used by the high priest who enters the holy places often year after year with blood not his own Bob, the text does not say "thereby providing many sacrifices". The PROSFERW of Christ in v. 25 is compared to the ENTRY with blood already shed. Quote Former Seventh-day Adventist
tall73 Posted November 23, 2009 Posted November 23, 2009 "present Himself often" would be another example of a key phrase in your argument that is missing. It is not missing at all Bob. The King James says: offer himself often "Offer" here is PROSFEREIN, which of course has been a major focus of our discussion. It means "offer" or "present" or "bring." Strongs prosphero pros-fer'-o From G4314 and G5342 (including its alternate); to bear towards, that is, lead to, tender (especially to God), treat: - bring (to, unto), deal with, do, offer (unto, up), present unto, put to. Thayers prosphero Thayer Definition: 1) to bring to, lead to 1a) one to a person who can heal him or is ready to show him some kindness, one to a person who is to judge him 1b) to bring a present or a thing, to reach or hand a thing to one 1c) to put to 2) to be borne towards one, to attack, assail 2a) to behave one’s self towards one, deal with one Part of Speech: verb Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament presents the following possibilities: Bring (to), offer, present, meet, deal with (in the passive). Quote Former Seventh-day Adventist
tall73 Posted November 23, 2009 Posted November 23, 2009 And now because this discussion could go on forever with a lot of repetition I am going to recapitulate my main positions, and folks can decide for themselves. There are other issues I would like to discuss as well, though I have enjoyed our conversation. My view is that Hebrews 9:23-25 shows the fulfillment of the cleansing of the heavenly things. It pictures Jesus entrance into God’s presence in our behalf, in the heavenly sanctuary, to present Himself, as the high priest enters with blood. The contested points center around several issues: Contested point 1: The implications of entry once for all. The entry in verse 12 is stated to be once for all. You think it was entry just into the sanctuary, then the inauguration is something separate. However, the entry is by means of blood. Blood was not necessary for the priest to enter the first compartment. They entered the first compartment for various reasons that did not require blood. Also the entry with blood is in comparison to entry with the blood of bulls and goats. Entry with blood of goats was only used in the Day of Atonement and the inauguration, both of which involved bulls and goats, and both of which extended to the Most Holy Place. So this entry is into the Most Holy place. And it is once for all, fulfilling all the entries. Just as the once-for-all sacrifice fulfilled all the sacrifices so the once-for-all entry fulfilled all the entries. The term High Priest is also used, which indicates Day of Atonement language rather than just inauguration language as the inauguration is referred to as done by Moses, not the high priest. And in the second temple it was done by Solomon. So both inauguration and Day of Atonement terms are present. So the once-for-all entry included the whole sanctuary, and took in all the entries, and particularly all the entries with blood. This included the Day of Atonement, the inauguration and the entry for sin offerings for the whole camp. We see this same entry referenced in Day of Atonement terms in verses 23-25 in describing the cleansing of the heavenly things. So it is not limited to inauguration entry, or just a generic entry into the sanctuary. Contested point 2: Meaning of PROSFERW You use other references to PROSFERW in Hebrews to press the point that PROSFERW in 9:25 has reference to the offering of the sacrifice in death. I agree that PROSFERW is used that way in other sections of Hebrews. But it also is used other ways in Hebrews, and in other parts of the NT and the LXX. In Hebrews for instance we see the following texts employing PROSFERW which are not referring to the offering of sacrifice: Jesus offered up prayers, not a sacrifice in 5:7. Heb 5:7 In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. The blood ministration on the Day of Atonement in the Most Holy Place is referenced in Hebrews 9:7 Heb 9:7 but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people. These are not speaking of the offering of an animal in sacrifice. But they are still using PROSFERW in its usual way. PROSFERW means to “present” or “offer” or “bring.” There is another use of PROSFERW which shows a usage somewhat different than the above in Hebrews: Heb 12:7 It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons. For what son is there whom his father does not discipline? The word “treating” is PROSFERW. Here are some comments on the term PROSFERW from lexicons: Strongs prosphero pros-fer'-o From G4314 and G5342 (including its alternate); to bear towards, that is, lead to, tender (especially to God), treat: - bring (to, unto), deal with, do, offer (unto, up), present unto, put to. Thayers prosphero Thayer Definition: 1) to bring to, lead to 1a) one to a person who can heal him or is ready to show him some kindness, one to a person who is to judge him 1b) to bring a present or a thing, to reach or hand a thing to one 1c) to put to 2) to be borne towards one, to attack, assail 2a) to behave one’s self towards one, deal with one Part of Speech: verb Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament lists the following possibilities: Bring (to), offer, present, meet, deal with (in the passive). So there is nothing in the definition that stipulates this is only used of an offering, and indeed we see other uses within Hebrews. Therefore each use must be examined to see what it means. It certainly appears in verse 25 that Jesus is presenting Himself to God. Whether that is referring to offering Himself as a sacrifice or whether that is referring to presentation in heaven is something the context must determine. Now year earlier contested that PROSFERW in Hebrews 9:7 refers to the blood manipulation on the Day of Atonement. However the entry is in view, and in particular the contrast of the frequency of entry into the first and second compartments: Heb 9:6 These preparations having thus been made, the priests go regularly into the first section, performing their ritual duties, Heb 9:7 but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people. Verse seven is in the section dealing with the arrangement of the sanctuary. The focus has been on the two compartments. Therefore it is likely that verse 6-7 will likewise focus on activity within those compartments. Entry is a point of contrast. The first compartment was regularly entered into in the course of various duties. But the entrance into the second compartment only happened on one occasion in the year, and not without blood, as stipulated in the rite in Lev. 16. God said Aaron was not to just enter however he wanted but gave specifications including bearing of blood. The blood is first taken in, then offered for himself and for the sins of the people. Offer then is talking about the presentation of blood in the second compartment. The whole point of the verse is to discuss what happens in the compartment. So the term offer/present here is speaking of the sprinkling of the blood in the holy of holies by the earthly high priest. I also offered the following expositors who deal with the Greek text who state this view: Adventist scholar Felix Cortez notes that this is referring to the blood manipulation: Interestingly, Hebrews departs from the language of the LXX to describe the manipulation of blood by the High Priest on the Day of Atonement: the blood is not “sprinkled” on the sanctuary but “offered” (9:7). (The Anchor of the Soul that Enters 'Within the Veil': The Ascension of the 'Son' in the Letter to the Hebrews 25) And so does B. F. Wescott in his commentary The Epistle to the Hebrews: the Greek texts with notes and essays: The sprinkling of the blood is regarded in a wider sense as an 'offering' which he makes for himself and for the ingnorance of the people. And so does The Expositors Greek Testament commentary This blood was offered, i.e., sprinkled with the finger on the [mercy seat] and again when talking about 9:25: But in ix. 7 PROSFERE; distinctly refers to the bringing in and application of the blood in the Holy of Holies, and the context of the present passage seems decidedly to make for the same interpretation. And so too Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, by Franz Delitsch The first of these three actions, that of "sprinkling" in the holy of holies, is here called PROSFEREIN And Lange's Commentary The expression PROSFEREIN TO AIMA . . . points to the sprinkling which was made once upwards and seven times downwards toward the Capporeth. And the same is indicated in A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews by Moses Stuart PROSFEREI designates the act of presenting the blood before the Lord as indicated in Lev. xvi.14-16. Contested point 3: Cleansing of the heavenly things—only inauguration? You stated that you see the cleansing of Hebrews 9 as only applying to the inauguration. For this point I offered the following evidence: Hebrews 22 sets the stage by speaking of blood cleansing in the law. Its purpose is forgiveness. So the cleansing is an outgrowth of the principle of blood cleansing. This goes beyond mere inauguration. Along this line I also noted two evidences by Adventist scholars William Johnsson in the Daniel and Revelation Committee volume Issues in the Book of Hebrews, in the article "Defilement/Purification and Hebrews 9:23," that note that the cleansing is not just about inauguration. First he notes the significance of verse 22. Verse 22 shows a broader perspective than simply inauguration. …verse 22 is to be seen as a contextual break. "Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins." When we give this verse its due weight, the supposed parallel is weakened. Many exegetes of Hebrews have seen in this verse the so-called "blood rule" a critical plank in the author's argument. It clearly looks far wider than inauguration, since it is dealing with aphesis, ("release," "pardon"). Verse 22, in fact, is summing up the role of blood in the OT. It is reaching back beyond verse 18 to embrace verses 1-21. (Johnsson 96) Verse 22 sums up the role of blood in the OT, and indeed before verse 22 a number of blood rites are described, not just the inauguration. They reference the sin offering, the red heifer, the covenant ratification and the inauguration. These are all related to blood. And in verse 22 the role of blood is noted in providing forgiveness which was not the key element in the inauguration, but is in the Day of Atonement. Johnson gives his next argument: But the strongest argument against this view, in my judgment, is the author's terminology. He uses katharizein ("to purify") not egkainizein ("to inaugurate"). These terms are not equivalent; they are not to be collapsed together. The cleansing for forgiveness is the Day of Atonement. I also noted that Ellen White applies the passage 9:23 to the Day of Atonement cleansing. A further evidence is that verses 23-25 go on to discuss this cleansing and verse 25 is admitted to be a Day of Atonement reference. Finally there is the evidence that Jesus made purification for sins already in the first century which is what the cleansing rite on the Day of Atonement INSIDE the sanctuary accomplished—a corporate cleansing for all sin. Heb 1:3b After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high Contested point 4: The connection of verse 25 to the entry. Verse 24 is plainly connected to verse 23. The term GAR indicates that the author is discussing this cleansing. You seem to acknowledge this, since your see it as connected to the inauguration. You also stipulated already that verse 24 has reference to the entry, and I agree. However, verse 25 is also connected by a connecting word, NOR or OUD. This ties it to the argument before. And more than just OUD the phrase OUD hINA is a reference back to verse 24. 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, Verse 24 starts with the phrase, For Christ has entered, not into the holy places…. Verse 25 also starts with a negative statement about Christ’s entry. Nor in order to offer Himself often…. The chain of not….nor shows the continuance of the argument regarding entry. He did not enter the heavenly sanctuary but the true Nor did He enter for the purpose of often offering Himself Now I before rendered hINA “in order that.” I made plain that a number of phrases could translate hINA. But you particularly objected to this phrasing. The point of course is that hINA is a purpose clause. It could be rendered in a number of ways such as “for the purpose of” “in order that” “so that”, etc. Your own resource, Robertson’s Word Pictures, points out that the hINA clause indicates purpose. In addition to this I provided other references regarding the meaning of hINA: A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, Dana and Maney Its full translation when final is "in order that", but what we usually find is simply "that". Strong's hina hin'-ah Probably from the same as the former part of G1438 (through the demonstrative idea; compare G3588); in order that (denoting the purpose or the result) Thayers hina Thayer Definition: 1) that, in order that, so that Gingrich's Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament: hINA conjuction--1. Denoting purpose, aim or goal, in order that, that The article on hINA in the abridged Theological Dictionary of the New Testament starts with: hINA [in order that] It is clear from the above resources that hINA indicates purpose. It is also clear that “in order that” is an acceptable rendering of the term. Now I also noted three Bible translations which supply the word “enter” in verse 25. They do this because they recognize the construction OUD hINA and that it must refer back to the entry of verse 24. Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. (New International Version) Nor did He [enter into the heavenly sanctuary to] offer Himself regularly again and again, as the high priest enters the [Holy of] Holies every year with blood not his own. (Amplified Bible) And he did not enter heaven to offer himself again and again, like the high priest here on earth who enters the Most Holy Place year after year with the blood of an animal. (New Living Translation) You objected to this on the basis that three other translations did not include the word "enter" in verse 25. I responded on that point that this was a result of differing approaches to translation. The three versions that I listed above are dynamic equivalents and will try to express the ideas in the Greek but not limit themselves to word-for-word translation. The ones that you listed are word-for-word translations. So even if they feel that a construction necessitates that something is being indicated they will not necessarily supply a word that is not in the text. Instead they try to convey what the text says and let the reader put it together. Therefore we would not expect them to supply the word enter. However the Greek here indicates that verse 25 is a continuation of the argument regarding Christ’s entry. Therefore the emphasis is not on Jesus death on earth in verse 25, but instead it is upon the entry into the sanctuary and presentation in God’s presence. I cited a number of commentaries that expound on this important phrase OUD hINA: The New International Greek Testament Commentary recognizes that the author's nor yet in order that is tied to the main clause in verse 24 for He has not entered: The author writes OUD hINA rather than OUC hINA because the main clause (OUR GAR . . . EISHLQHN) is expressed negatively. Or to put that in English, the author writes "nor yet" rather than "not in order that" because the main clause (For not ....entered) is expressed negatively. The Interpretation: The Epistle to the Hebrews OU and now OUDE: Christ did "not...nor," etc. Christ did not enter into a mere earthly sanctuary; nor (did he enter heaven) in order to be offering himself often like as the high priest enters into the sanctuary year by year In English the first part reads: "Not" and now "nor yet" Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, by Franz Delitsch V. 25 Nor yet (is he entered in) that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy of holies year by year with alien blood. Expositor’s Bible Commentary Where there is nothing in the Greek corresponding to NIV’s “did he enter heaven,” the words seem required. Vincet's Word Studies Nor yet that (OUD hINA) Supply did he enter. “Nor yet did he enter that he might offer,” etc. Now apart from the linguistic data there is further evidence that verse 25 is dealing with entry by Christ into the heavenly sanctuary. a. The context is dealing with the cleansing of the heavenly things which did involve entry. b. The immediate context is verse 24 which dealt with entry. c. The comparison in verse 25 is not to the killing of the animal but the ENTRY of the high priest with blood on the Day of Atonement. 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 As the high priest ENTERS….that is clearly referencing the activity in the sanctuary. Contested point 5: You argue that verse 26 –28 refutes the position that the offering of 25 is a reference to heavenly presenatation. However, in saying so you miss the progression of the argument. 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 9:26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. Heb 9:27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, Heb 9:28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him. v. 25 Jesus did not enter so that He might present Himself repeatedly v.26a IF Jesus had entered often to present Himself then He would have had to die repeatedly. v.26b Jesus appeared once to put away sin by sacrifice of Himself—He died once. Vss. 27-28, further evidence that Jesus died only once. It is appointed once to die, people don’t die more than once. Christ was offered once to bear sins. So the assertion in verse 25 which is denied, that Jesus would need to present Himself often in God’s presence, is addressed by noting that it would require frequent suffering as well, which is ruled out by the fact that Jesus died once for all, and man only dies once. Now, you have asserted that my reading of the text is not supported by the text. But in addition to the commentary, etc. supporting the individual points of the argument there are also a number of commentaries which agree with my position that Jesus' offering of Himself in verse 25 is in fact speaking not of the death on the cross but presentation in heaven. The Expositor’s Greek Testament “Nor yet [did he enter in] in order to offer Himself repeatedly,” that is, He did not enter in for a brief stay from which He was to return to renew His sacrifice. And also But in ix. 7 PROSFEREI distinctly refers to the bringing in and application of the blood in the Holy of Holies, and the context of the present passage seems decidedly to make for the same interpretation. The sequence of the hINA clause after EISHLQEN ; the analogy presented in the clause under WSPER; and the consequences stated under EPEI (ver. 26) all combine in favouring this meaning. The high priest enters the Holiest annually, but Christ’s entering in was of another kind, not requiring repetition. Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews by Franz Delitsch V. 25 Nor yet (is he entered in) that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy of holies year by year with alien blood. The comparison is between the offering of the Jewish high priest within the veil, and that of Christ in the eternal sanctuary: the PROSFEREIN EAUTON here spoken of cannot therefore be . . .the self-sacrifice of Christ upon earth, but a self-presentation subsequent to that. The Jewish high priest goes year by year into the typical sanctuary, EN . . . AIMATI ALLOTRIW, i.e. to offer there the blood of a sacrifice which is not himself. Not so with Christ. He is gone into the heavenly sanctuary once for all, not to offer Himself first now, and then again some time hence, and again afterwards, and so on in perpetual succession. On verse 26: An of-repeated self-oblation (POLLAKIS PROSFEREIN EAUTON) would have been impossible without an oft-repeated suffering of death (POLLAKIS PAQEIN). Commentary on the New Testament by D. D. Whedon This offer is parallel to the entereth of the high priest; it, therefore does not here mean to sacrifice himself, but to present himself in heaven, as the high priest presented himself in the holy place. Yet in both cases a previous sacrifice takes place. The Greek Testament, on vs. 26, in reference to 25 and 26 and the argument therein: This PAQEIN is here not equivalent to that PROSFEREIN, but is emphatically placed as a new necessity, involved in that; the POLLAKIS being common to both: the POLLAKIS PROSFEREIN necessitated the POLLAKIS PAQEIN. If Christ’s view in entering heaven was to offer, present, himself often to God, then, as a condition of that frequent presentation, there would be an antecedent necessity for Him to suffer often: because that self-presentation is in fact the bringing in before God of the Blood of that his suffering: and if the one was to be renewed, so must the other be likewise. Jamieson Faussett Brown Construe, "Nor yet did He enter for this purpose that He may offer Himself often," that is, "present Himself in the presence of God, as the high priest does (Paul uses the present tense, as the legal service was then existing), year by year, on the Day of Atonement, entering the Holy of Holies. Beacon Bible Commentary Extends the thought of the previous verse by affirming that this crucial self-presentation before the Father does not need to be repeated, as the high priest entereth into the [earthly] holy place every year with blood of others. Vincet's Word Studies Offer himself refers rather to Christ's entrance into the heavenly sanctuary and presentation of himself before God, than to his offering on the cross...The sacrifice on the cross is described by PAQEIN suffer, Heb 9:26, and is introduced as a distinct thought. The point is that, being once in the heavenly sanctuary, Christ was not compelled to renew often his presentation of himself there, since, in that case, it would be necessary for him to suffer often. Each separate offering would necessitate a corresponding suffering. The Epistle to the Hebrews: The First Apology for Christianity, An Exegetical Study, by Alexander Balmain Bruce These verses (25-28) may be paraphrased thus: Christ has entered into the heavenly sanctuary to appear in the presence of God for us, and to abide there, herein differing from the Levitical high priest, who went into the most holy place and came out and went in again, repeating the process year by year, and making many appearances before God, with the blood of fresh sacrifices. Christ presents Himself before God once for all, remaining in the celestial sanctuary, and not going out and coming in again and again. It must be so; any other state of things would involve an absurdity. If Christ were to go in and come out, go in and come out, again and again, that would imply His dying over and over again; for the object of the repeated self-presentations in the presence of God on the part of the Jewish high priest was to offer the blood of new victims; but as Christ’s sacrifice was Himself, each new self-presentation would in His case imply a previous repetition of His passion. He must often on that supposition have suffered death since the foundation of the world. Contested point 6 You claim that I see Jesus entry and presentation of Himself to make purification as the cessation of the sanctuary or of Jesus as our High Priest. That is not true. I do not see this ending Jesus’ ministration as High Priest. The text plainly says that He ever lives to make intercession for us. It also says we come boldly to the throne of grace to find help in time of need. Rather what I see is that Jesus fulfilled the portion of the Day of Atonement type of cleansing that happened in the sanctuary. That cleansing was a corporate cleansing for all sin. On the Day of Atonement the high priest would make cleansing in the sanctuary. Outside folks would be afflicting themselves or not. They would accept the work done by the priest or reject it. But the same cleansing would be made. Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world: 1Jn 2:2 He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. Some accept this provision and some do not. But the provision was already made in the first century. And it is already seen as cleansing sin, and perfecting us, though in fact many were not even alive yet to accept it, and we accept it in real time. Nonetheless this cleansing is seen as a completed work, and we enter into it. In this way it is similar to the cleansing in the sanctuary in the type. Jesus completed the following by this cleansing: He made purification for sins. By the time Jesus sat down He had made purification for sins. Heb 1:3b After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high Making purification for all sins is exactly what the cleansing in the sanctuary on the Day of Atonement was all about. And it is seen as accomplished already in the first century. The word for cleansing here is from the same root as the cleansing in 9:23 of the heavenly things, another evidence that these two cleansing passages are related. Heb 10:10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. We have already been sanctified for all time. The key term, having been sanctified, is in the perfect tense, indicating past tense completed action with ongoing results. We are perfected: Heb 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. Again perfected is in the perfect tense. So I see Jesus as having made this corporate cleansing for sins, and perfecting of us in the past tense. This makes sense for another reason as well. In the type everyone who was in the camp during the year, barring those who died, would participate in the service. They would each have a chance to put their faith in the atonement made by the high priest on the Day of Atonement. Jesus made cleansing right at the outset of the Christian era. All Christians have had an opportunity to accept that completed work of making purification for sins. In the Adventist version, on the other hand, only Christians after 1844 have this opportunity of accepting the Day of Atonement work of their heavenly High Priest. On another point, at the root of some of our different understanding of the Day of Atonement type is the question of whether sin cleanses or defiles. But Hebrews 9:22 is very clear in this regard. Blood cleanses. This was true in the various rites in the law. Therefore there is no necessity at all for the Day of Atonement to be a two –stage process of atonement. Both the Day of Atonement and the sin offering are said to make atonement. One is a lesson for the individual as the person realizes the cost of a certain committed sin. The other is the corporate picture of cleansing of sin by God’s provision. I gave a number of evidences on the notion that in fact sin is not transferred by the sin offering, but is said to be transferred by defiled people, sins of people, etc. I won’t reproduce them all here because they are lengthy. But I think I have the forum set to view the max number of posts per thread and they are at the bottom of page three for me if you are wanting to review them. Since you did not contest that section after it was posted I assumed that was a non-issue. You noted that the animal only receives sin before death and Jesus does not bear sin to heaven. And I agree. But Ellen White does not agree, she sees Jesus transferring sin to heaven by His blood. You also noted that in the type the blood is not investigated for blemish, and that it cleanses. And again I agree. But then the Adventist fulfillment of the type does not make sense. Adventists see the IJ as applying to the cleansing in the sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. But there is no investigation in the sanctuary but cleansing application of blood. The priest did not examine the blood, or books, but cleansed with blood. Contested point 7 The timing of the type. You have raised issues of the timing of the type. But there are a number of other areas where a reading of the type would not completely prepare us for the nature of Jesus’ superior fulfillment. Some of these change the timing of the type, such as the death once for all, and the entry once for all. There is also the change from levitical to Melchizedekian priesthood, the fact that Jesus does not offer for Himself because He is sinless, Jesus performing the inauguration as High Priest, whereas the priest did not officiate in the wilderness sanctuary or second sanctuary service, the death of Jesus outside of the sanctuary rather than in it, etc. These are all fulfillments, and some are anticipated by other portions of the Old Testament than the Levitical types. But all of them change some elements of what we would expect from just reading the type. Therefore my position is that if the New Testament spells out a fulfillment I accept it, just as we do with the above, based on the text. I don’t argue based on my view of what the type SHOULD be. If the New Testament text does not talk about an aspect I can make some suppositions based on the type. But I should keep in mind that the better fulfillments of Jesus often go beyond the type and can cause some surprises. The bigger picture: Hebrews focuses on Jesus being better. Jesus is better than Moses, better than angels, His covenant is better, His sacrifice is better, His blood is better, etc. With this context in mind the author introduces the Day of Atonement entry and blood manipulation in verse 7. He goes on to show how Jesus fulfilled it in a better way, just as He was better in many other ways. We see that verse 23 specifically speaks of the cleansing of the heavenly things, and that it is tied to Jesus entry into God’s presence in verse 24. This presentation in God’s presence did not need to be made often. And this presentation is compared to the ENTRY of the high priest with blood, which is another Day of Atonement reference. And the result of all this is that Jesus made purification for sins, which is the goal on the Day of Atonement, corporate atonement for all sins. So we see that the Day of Atonement plays a prominent role in the section. It is by no means the only rite mentioned. But the author does reference it as one area where Jesus’ fulfillment surpasses the earthly type. One other reference to the Day of Atonement is the authors references to the access we have to God’s immediate presence through what Christ accomplished. Jesus went right in to sit in God’s presence, which far surpassed the access of the earthly high priest on the Day of Atonement as described in 9:7. But not only did Jesus far surpass the earthly high priest’s access but He allows us to as well. We come boldly to the throne of grace to find help in time of need: 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 has prepared the way into God’s presence for us. He washed us with water and sprinkled us, just as the earthly priest was in the dedication. But we can have even greater access than they could. We are washed and sprinkled in the perfect tense, past action, ongoing results. Heb 10:19 Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, Heb 10:20 by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, Heb 10:21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, Heb 10:22 let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. Aaron and his sons, the priests, were washed with pure water and sprinkled with blood in the consecration services, as seen in Exodus 29 and Lev. 8. Lev 8:1 The LORD spoke to Moses, saying, Lev 8:2 "Take Aaron and his sons with him, and the garments and the anointing oil and the bull of the sin offering and the two rams and the basket of unleavened bread. Lev 8:3 And assemble all the congregation at the entrance of the tent of meeting." Lev 8:4 And Moses did as the LORD commanded him, and the congregation was assembled at the entrance of the tent of meeting. Lev 8:5 And Moses said to the congregation, "This is the thing that the LORD has commanded to be done." Lev 8:6 And Moses brought Aaron and his sons and washed them with water. Lev 8:30 Then Moses took some of the anointing oil and of the blood that was on the altar and sprinkled it on Aaron and his garments, and also on his sons and his sons' garments. So he consecrated Aaron and his garments, and his sons and his sons' garments with him. This remarkable access shows what has been accomplished through Jesus’ work in the first century. We have been cleansed to have direct access to God. Quote Former Seventh-day Adventist
BobRyan Posted November 23, 2009 Posted November 23, 2009 Points that are clear from Scripture. 1. Christ offers up One Sacrifice – for all time Heb 9:25-28 10:10. All sacrifices collapse into one. 2. Christ enters “once” into the heavenly Sanctuary (vs 11) Heb 9:11-12. All entry into the sanctuary collapses into one. 3. The events of the antitype – are distinct and separate a. Passover (1Cor 5) – Christ our Passover lamb is slain – ON Passover. b. First Fruits. (1Cor 15) – Christ the first fruits of the dead – raised up ON the feast of First Fruits c. Pentecost (Acts 2) – Outpouring the Holy Spirit – happens ON Pentecost d. Day of Atonement (Lev 16) – Dan 8:14 – happens ON the Day of Atonement Heb 9 never says that “Christ offers his blood once for all in the Sanctuary”. Heb 9 never argues that the ministry of the benefits of the sacrifice has ended in the heavenly Sanctuary Heb 9 never argues that the Day of Atonement event in heaven has already begun. Heb 9 does state that the inauguration event in heaven is in the past. Heb 9 does state that the benefits realized in the daily service of the sanctuary are current and ongoing. Vs 11-15 On the Altar of sacrifice (the cross) – the “body of Christ” is offered as a sacrifice – Heb 10:10 “once for all” On the Altar of sacrifice (the cross) – Christ is in the role of the sacrificial lamb – “bearing the sins of many” – Heb 9:28 But now “ongoing” Christ “appears in the presence of God for us” Heb 9:24 As our High Priest. =============================================================== A. Christ entered the sanctuary once for all (Heb 9:11-12) -- there is no way to escape that point. (NASB says that He entered the Holy Place once for all (9:12) -- but we will allow that this is in fact the "Sanctuary" itself since vs 11 refers to the entire sanctuary, not just the Holy Place since inauguration follows entry -- as does the Daily and then the ending "Day of Atonement") You argue that this cannot include the Holy Place even though scripture says it does. Your argument is with the text. You insist that "Blood was not necessary for the priest to enter the first compartment. They entered the first compartment for various reasons that did not require blood". Heb 9 mentions the daily work of the sanctuary in cleansing each individual person in vs 12-14 which of course John also references in 1John 1:9 and 1John 2:1. The very daily activity regarding sacrifices and offerings and cleansing your argument is anxious to avoid. B. The Daily service is found a number of times in Heb 9 including vs 12-14 where even the ashes of the Heifer (for cleansing of the unclean person at any time during the year Numbers 19:17) is included. You argue in essence that Lev 4 "does not exist" in your statement "Entry with blood of goats was only used in the Day of Atonement and the inauguration,". That Lev 4 does "exist" and does show goats offered for sins during the daily service - remains as an exercise for the reader. That the ashes of the heifer are used outside of the Day of Atonement context as seen in Numbers 19 is also left as an exercise for the reader. Also you have already agreed that "all sacrifices" collapse into "one" at the cross - which means bulls, goats, doves, calves, etc all are represented there -- so no "this sacrifice but not that one" argument possible from Heb 9. C. Christ as "High Priest" collapses ALL functions of the priesthood into one person such that Paul argues in Heb 7:27 that "High Priest" OFFERS UP (in smoke) sacrifices "daily" Your argument is that the High Priest role excludes all the daily activitythough that is refuted explicitly in Heb 7:27 (NASB) D. Inauguration: 1Kings 8:6-11 states that the Priests (not Solomon) entered the Most Holy Place -- taking the ark into it and then the glory of the Lord Filled the temple so that NO ONE could enter. By contrast you argue that non-priests - even non-levites do this inauguration work in the Most Holy Place "inauguration is referred to as done by Moses, not the high priest. And in the second temple it was done by Solomon. So both inauguration and Day of Atonement terms are present". Inauguration is completed in the heavenly according to vs 18-21 of Heb 9. No mention made there of Day of Atonement completed. Then a more general all-inclusive "principle for cleansing" is identified in vs 22 "without the shedding of blood no remission of sins" to prove that this cleansing was needed. (A general principle applicable to the daily. to the inauguration and to all services involving sacrifice and forgiveness). you argue "Hebrews 9:22 sets the stage by speaking of blood cleansing in the law. Its purpose is forgiveness. So the cleansing is an outgrowth of the principle of blood cleansing. This goes beyond mere inauguration. " In Heb 9:22 there is no claim to anything other than the general principle regarding the need for blood for cleansing. Taking that beyond what is written -- appears to be a requirement in your argument. There is no "Day of atonement in heaven" started language in Heb 9 much less "Day of Atonement completed" language. But there is inauguration completed language found in Heb 9. Even Heb 9:24-28 uses language showing the entire year -- (that which was done all year - year after year) being addressed by Christ's ministry - but does not say that the ministry of blood in the heavenly sanctuary is over NOR even that Day of Atonement is even started. E. Paul starts Heb 9 arguing that the old Sanctuary model IS a good key to the Heavenly sanctuary service after stating that by contrast there is only 1 Priest in heaven and in Heb 9 that there is only 1 sacrifice and one entry into the sanctuary in heaven vs 11 (into the more perfect sanctuary not made with hands") How then can we take your suggestion that we simply ignore the fact that your model does not fit at all with the OT sanctuary model for you argue that the Daily service is not even addressed!!. Again that is instructive for the reader. Contested point 7 The timing of the type. You have raised issues of the timing of the type. But there are a number of other areas where a reading of the type would not completely prepare us for the nature of Jesus’ superior fulfillment. Some of these change the timing of the type, such as the death once for all, and the entry once for all. There is also the change from levitical to Melchizedekian priesthood, the fact that Jesus does not offer for Himself because He is sinless, Jesus performing the inauguration as High Priest, whereas the priest did not officiate in the wilderness sanctuary or second sanctuary service, the death of Jesus outside of the sanctuary rather than in it, etc. As noted Your "priest did not officiate" idea for inauguration and dedication is confusing given the actual text of 1Kings 8:8-11 Ezra 6:5-18 says nothing about priests not doing the work of dedication of the temple Ezek 45:18-19 is clear that it is the priest that cleanses the sanctuary via offerings. You seem to have no answer at all for the fact that Passover, Feast of First Fruits, Pentecost happen in antitype on DIFFERENT days instead of all collapsed into one to only focus on Day of Atonement. (And ALL of them NOT part of the Day of Atonement) In my opinion it takes too much of a liberal "imagination beyond what is written" to support your "no daily service phase" idea for the heavenly sanctuary. in Christ, Bob Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
BobRyan Posted November 23, 2009 Posted November 23, 2009 4. Ellen White is not the author of Heb 9 -- there we see that even things in heaven are purified by blood. Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
tall73 Posted November 25, 2009 Posted November 25, 2009 I was intending to not respond, but there were two points I found that you misunderstood so decided to reply to some of the others as well. Points that are clear from Scripture. 1. Christ offers up One Sacrifice – for all time Heb 9:25-28 10:10. All sacrifices collapse into one. 2. Christ enters “once” into the heavenly Sanctuary (vs 11) Heb 9:11-12. All entry into the sanctuary collapses into one. Quote Former Seventh-day Adventist
tall73 Posted November 26, 2009 Posted November 26, 2009 C. Christ as "High Priest" collapses ALL functions of the priesthood into one person such that Paul argues in Heb 7:27 that "High Priest" OFFERS UP (in smoke) sacrifices "daily" Your argument is that the High Priest role excludes all the daily activitythough that is refuted explicitly in Heb 7:27 (NASB) Quote Former Seventh-day Adventist
tall73 Posted November 26, 2009 Posted November 26, 2009 How so? Because you admit that the blood portion in the sanctuary is not about investigation. Quote Former Seventh-day Adventist
BobRyan Posted November 30, 2009 Posted November 30, 2009 3. The events of the antitype – are distinct and separate a. Passover (1Cor 5) – Christ our Passover lamb is slain – ON Passover. b. First Fruits. (1Cor 15) – Christ the first fruits of the dead – raised up ON the feast of First Fruits c. Pentecost (Acts 2) – Outpouring the Holy Spirit – happens ON Pentecost d. Day of Atonement (Lev 16) – Dan 8:14 – happens ON the Day of Atonement Heb 9 never says that “Christ offers his blood once for all in the Sanctuary”. Heb 9 never argues that the ministry of the benefits of the sacrifice has ended in the heavenly Sanctuary Heb 9 never argues that the Day of Atonement event in heaven has already begun. Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
BobRyan Posted November 30, 2009 Posted November 30, 2009 Other elements of the services happen at their appointed time. Heb 9 never says that “Christ offers his blood once for all in the Sanctuary”. It uses the same word as 9:7 for the blood manipulation by the high priest, precisely because Jesus does not sprinkle HImself--He is alive. Heb 9 never argues that the ministry of the benefits of the sacrifice has ended in the heavenly Sanctuary Heb 9 never argues that the Day of Atonement event in heaven has already begun. Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
BobRyan Posted November 30, 2009 Posted November 30, 2009 You insist that "Blood was not necessary for the priest to enter the first compartment. They entered the first compartment for various reasons that did not require blood". Heb 9 mentions the daily work of the sanctuary in cleansing each individual person in vs 12-14 which of course John also references in 1John 1:9 and 1John 2:1. The very daily activity regarding sacrifices and offerings and cleansing your argument is anxious to avoid. Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
BobRyan Posted November 30, 2009 Posted November 30, 2009 Heb 9 vs 25-26 is not saying "he did not enter often for then he would have to suffer often" as if trying to justify why it is he does not enter often. Rather as we see below -- the argument Paul is addressing is why Christ is sacrificed only ONCE (offering himself to bear the sins of many -- ONE time ONLY) instead of many times. Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
BobRyan Posted November 30, 2009 Posted November 30, 2009 . Adventists hold that the cleansing in the sanctuary is a fulfillment of the cleansing in the sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. But the cleansing on the DOA was a cleansing application of blood for forgiveness of all the sins in the camp. Jesus did that already in the first century. He made purification for sins. The cleansing on the DOA was not about investigation but purifcation. 1. Adventists argue that the "without the shedding of blood - no remission of sins" argument is a general principle that applies to the entire sanctuary model. 2. Adventist argue that the " 23It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these." is also a general principle applicable to both the inauguration type and the Day of Atonement - showing the "need for cleansing" but not indicating that the Day of Atonement service had started or that anything other than the inauguration "cleansing" had already taken place in heaven -- regarding the heavenly things already cleansed. 3. As pointed out - both Hebrew scholars and SDA scholars (and many non-SDA Christian scholars) point to the fact that the Day of Atonement event typified judgment. 4. The Daniel 7 and 8 parallel confirms those observations making it crystal clear - beyond a doubt. 5. There is no DOA service in the first century AD in heaven -- it simply is not there. in Christ, Bob Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
BytheWord Posted December 7, 2009 Posted December 7, 2009 Here are some additional Bible Text and thoughts on this topic. The Bible clearly does teach that the earthly sanctuary was a type of the heavenly sanctuary and that type would meet anti-type in Christ. Christ was not only the Lamb of God on calvary but also the High Priest, Savior and King, the Conquer of sin and death. What Christ did on calvary was to present the sin offering as the Lamb of God. This represented the sanctuary work that took place in the outer court/with out the camp out side of the sanctuary in the earthly type. Heb 13:10 We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle. Heb 13:11 For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp. Heb 13:12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate. Heb 13:13 Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach. Why would Paul repeatedly refer to the typical pattern and order of the sanctuary service if it was not relevant and important? Calvary was the outer court out side of the sanctuary and Christ was not officiating as High Priest until after His Sacrificial Offering was accepted by the Father. At that time He was Ordained and Anointed as High Priest and Inaugurated as King of Glory-Son of God. And then He began His High Priestly work for us sinners only after His Inauguration services in heaven. 1. If the atonement was made on Calvary, by whom was it made? The making of the atonement is the work of a Priest? but who officiated on Calvary? - Roman soldiers and wicked Jews. 2. The slaying of the victim was not making the atonement: the sinner slew the victim, Leviticus 4:1-4, 13-15. etc., after that the Priest took the blood and made the atonement. Leviticus 4:5-12, 16-21. 3. Christ was the appointed High priest to make the atonement, and he certainly could not have acted in that capacity till after his resurrection, and we have no record of his doing any thing on earth after his resurrection, which could be called the atonement. 4. The atonement was made in the Sanctuary, but Calvary was not such a place. 5. He could not, according to Hebrews 8:4, make the atonement while on earth. "If he were on earth, he should not be a Priest." The Levitical was the earthly priesthood, the Divine, the heavenly. 6. Therefore, he did not begin the work of making the atonement, whatever the nature of that work may be, till after his ascension, when by his own blood he entered his heavenly Sanctuary for us. Let us now examine a few texts that appear to speak of the atonement as passed. Romans 5:11; "By whom we have now received the atonement," (margin, reconciliation). This passage clearly shows a present possession of the atonement at that time the apostle wrote; but it by no means proves that the entire atonement was then in the past. I believe that Christ was first Inaugurated in Heaven upon His ascension as the King of Glory and given His Glory back that He had with the Father God before the world began because He humbled Himself even unto death to redeem humanity. And that is what Paul was referring to when He says Christ is seated at the right hand of God. Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Heb 1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. Heb 1:10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: And that is what is meant when Paul says that He sat down on the throne at the right hand of God. He was Glorified as God in heaven by this Inauguration Service. But we will see later that this throne where Christ is seated at the right hand of God the Father is in the Holy Place of the Heavenly Sanctuary. It is the throne of Grace and not the throne of His Glory where he sits when He comes as King in the second Advent. The throne of Grace is where He sits at the Father’s right hand in the Holy Place. "As used in the Bible, the expression kingdom of God is employed to designate both the kingdom of grace and the kingdom of glory. The kingdom of grace is brought to view by Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews. After pointing to Christ, the compassionate intercessor who is touched with the feeling of our infirmities, the apostle says: Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace. Hebrews 4:15, 16. The throne of grace represents the kingdom of grace; for the existence of a throne implies the existence of a kingdom. In many of His parables Christ uses the expression the kingdom of heaven to designate the work of divine grace upon the hearts of men. "So the throne of glory represents the kingdom of glory; and this kingdom is referred to in the Saviour's words: When the Son of man shall come in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then shall He sit upon the throne of His glory: and before Him shall be gathered all nations. Matthew 25:31, 32. This kingdom is yet future. It is not to be set up until the second advent of Christ. "The kingdom of grace was instituted immediately after the fall of man, when a plan was devised for the redemption of the guilty race. It then existed in the purpose and by the promise of God; and through faith, men could become its subjects. Yet it was not actually established until the death of Christ." Great Controversy, 347-348. Christ sits now on at the Father’s throne at His right side. And He is King of a spiritual kingdom the kingdom of grace as a priest and mediator. "The work of Christ as mans intercessor is presented in that beautiful prophecy of Zechariah concerning Him whose name is the Branch. Says the prophet: He shall build the temple of the Lord; and He shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon His [the Fathers] throne; and He shall be a priest upon His throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between Them both. Zechariah 6:12, 13."Great Controversy 415-416. "He shall sit and rule upon His throne; and He shall be a priest upon His throne. Not now upon the throne of His glory; the kingdom of glory has not yet been ushered in. Not until His work as a mediator shall be ended will God give unto Him the throne of His father David, a kingdom of which there shall be no end. Luke 1:32, 33. As a priest, Christ is now set down with the Father in His throne." Revelation 3:21."Ibid., 416. Not until later will He sit on His throne of glory. And He receives His Kingdom of Glory as King of Glory before He comes back in the second Advent. He received His Bride the New Jerusalem after He completes His Priestly Work in the Most Holy Place in heaven after human probation closes and His mediatorial work is completed. "And, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him. And there was given Him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve Him: His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away. Daniel 7:13, 14. The coming of Christ here described is not His second coming to the earth. He comes to the Ancient of Days in heaven to receive dominion and glory and a kingdom, which will be given Him at the close of His work as a mediator." Great Controversy, 479-480. "Christ had ascended to heaven in the form of humanity. The disciples had beheld the cloud receive Him. The same Jesus who had walked and talked and prayed with them; who had broken bread with them; who had been with them in their boats on the lake; and who had that very day toiled with them up the ascent of Olivet, the same Jesus had now gone to share His Fathers throne." Desire of Ages, 832. "Before leaving His disciples, Christ plainly stated the nature of His kingdom. He called to their minds what He had previously told them concerning it. He declared that it was not His purpose to establish in this world a temporal, but a spiritual kingdom. He was not to reign as an earthly king on David’s throne." Ibid., 820. For more on this topic of a spiritual kingdom, read Acts of the Apostles, 30, and Desire of Ages, 333. (To be continued in part two) Quote
BytheWord Posted December 7, 2009 Posted December 7, 2009 Continued... Part 2 of 3 "For eighteen centuries this work of ministration continued in the first apartment of the sanctuary. The blood of Christ, pleaded in behalf of penitent believers, secured their pardon and acceptance with the Father, yet their sins still remained upon the books of record. As in the typical service there was a work of atonement at the close of the year, so before Christ's work for the redemption of men is completed there is a work of atonement for the removal of sin from the sanctuary. This is the service which began when the 2300 days ended. At that time, as foretold by Daniel the prophet, our High Priest entered the most holy, to perform the last division of His solemn work--to cleanse the sanctuary. "As anciently the sins of the people were by faith placed upon the sin offering and through its blood transferred, in figure, to the earthly sanctuary, so in the new covenant the sins of the repentant are by faith placed upon Christ and transferred, in fact, to the heavenly sanctuary. And as the typical cleansing of the earthly was accomplished by the removal of the sins by which it had been polluted, so the actual cleansing of the heavenly is to be accomplished by the removal, or blotting out, of the sins which are there recorded. But before this can be accomplished, there must be an examination of the books of record to determine who, through repentance of sin and faith in Christ, are entitled to the benefits of His atonement. The cleansing of the sanctuary therefore involves a work of investigation--a work of judgment. This work must be performed prior to the coming of Christ to redeem His people; for when He comes, His reward is with Him to give to every man according to his works. Revelation 22:12."Great Controversy, 421-422. Now more biblical evidence to consider showing that Christ was Anointed in heaven before he began to work as our High Priest in the Holy Place. Christ ascend to heaven after his resurrection before He let his disciples touch him. In John 20:16-17 we read.“Jesus said to her, “Mary!” She turned and said to Him, “Rabboni!” (which is to say, Teacher). 17, Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.’” What do you suppose he did up there? Note the parallel, he appeared to them after his first ascension after eight days, and it was on the eight day that the work began in the type of the earthly sanctuary once the consecration was finished in the previous seven days. In the type on earth this Anointing service took seven days. Note carefully that he was not to be touched, because he was about to ascend to the Father who is in heaven. Then on the same day he appeared unto his disciples, but there is no indication that they touched him here either. Rather, the text says he "showed" them his wounds (John 20:20). But eight days later, he appeared to them once more, quieting Thomas' doubts by telling him to touch his hands and side (verses 26, 27). This means that between the day he told Mary not to touch him, and the day he told Thomas to touch him, he must have ascended into heaven, for he at first forbade being touched for this very reason. And the time between these two events was eight literal days. On the first day, after appearing to his disciples, Jesus ascends in his untouched sacrifice without spot or blemish in this condition He goes to the presence of the Father, spends seven days in heaven where the Heavenly Sanctuary is located, He was Anointed and Inaugurated as Priest and King by God the Father and the Holy Spirit, then later "appears" to his disciples once more. This parallels the events of the typical services in the earthly sanctuary Christ first offered Himself as the Lamb of God without a spot or blemish-no sin, a perfect sacrifice finished and complete on calvary. Christ work as the Lamb was finished and complete on calvary. But His High Priestly work was just beginning in heaven. In the typical earthly sanctuary, Moses Anointed the Priest and his sons and entered into the sanctuary on the first day of the seven-days of consecration to anoint everything there in (Leviticus 8:10), in which afterwards on the eight day "appears" in the presence of the children of Israel.In the Anti-type Christ appeared to His Disciples on the eight day after His Dedication/Anointing in Heaven. Did you just see what happened? Lev 8:5 And Moses said unto the congregation, This is the thing which the LORD commanded to be done.Lev 8:6 And Moses brought Aaron and his sons, and washed them with water.Lev 8:7 And he put upon him the coat, and girded him with the girdle, and clothed him with the robe, and put the ephod upon him, and he girded him with the curious girdle of the ephod, and bound it unto him therewith. Lev 8:8 And he put the breastplate upon him: also he put in the breastplate the Urim and the Thummim. Lev 8:9 And he put the mitre upon his head; also upon the mitre, even upon his forefront, did he put the golden plate, the holy crown; as the LORD commanded Moses. Lev 8:10 And Moses took the anointing oil, and anointed the tabernacle and all that was therein, and sanctified them. Lev 8:11 And he sprinkled thereof upon the altar seven times, and anointed the altar and all his vessels, both the laver and his foot, to sanctify them. Lev 8:12 And he poured of the anointing oil upon Aaron's head, and anointed him, to sanctify him. Lev 8:13 And Moses brought Aaron's sons, and put coats upon them, and girded them with girdles, and put bonnets upon them; as the LORD commanded Moses.Lev 8:31 And Moses said unto Aaron and to his sons, Boil the flesh at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation: and there eat it with the bread that is in the basket of consecrations, as I commanded, saying, Aaron and his sons shall eat it. Lev 8:32 And that which remaineth of the flesh and of the bread shall ye burn with fire. Lev 8:33 And ye shall not go out of the door of the tabernacle of the congregation in seven days, until the days of your consecration be at an end: for seven days shall he consecrate you. The Lord Jesus is not only the fulfillment of the various priestly services, but also the fulfillment of the consecration of those things! He was Anointed in Heaven by God the Father after His sacrifice was offered and He became our High Priest sitting on the throne of Grace in His Spiritual Kingdom as King and Priest after the order of Melchisedec. This is also the fulfillment of the prophecy of Dan 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. (Christ sacrifice made an end of sins and brought in everlasting righteousness and Christ and the Heavenly Sanctuary were Anointed upon His ascension to Heaven in fulfillment of Dan.9:24 And this took place in 31 A.D.) There are also some more things we learn like the things of the earthly sanctuary were not the "very image" of those things in heaven, but only a figure, or shadow (see Hebrews 10:1). So I would expect some differences between the earthly and the heavenly. For example we know that in the heavenly sanctuary in the Holy Place there is also a throne of grace where Christ sits but in the earthly sanctuary there was no throne in the Holy Place. The throne or mercy seat was only in the Most Holy Place. Also there is no need of some of the furniture and altars designed for the blood of animals. So some clear differences are here in the sanctuary in heaven including the size of the temple/sanctuary in heaven and the two apartments thereof. And in the scriptures it says "everything" needed consecration, including the Most Holy Place as seen in Leviticus 8. And also see Exo.40: But the Priest never enter in the MHP during this anointing service, Moses did as he represented the Father God with the Anointing Oil- the Father God and Holy Spirit enter the MHP to Anoint it and all that is therein. If we return to Paul, we notice the following order of events: Hebrews 9:6-7 Consecration: "Now when these things were thus ordained" Ministry in the Holy Place: "the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God." Ministry in the Most Holy Place: "But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people" Note that Paul confirms what I said above, that EVERY THING needed to be consecrated. First he describes the various parts of both the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place in Hebrews 9: (verses 1-5). Then he say that all those things must first be "ordained" (now when these things were thus ordained/anointed). Ellen’s comments: “The holy places of the sanctuary in heaven are represented by the two apartments in the sanctuary on earth. As in vision the apostle John was granted a view of the temple of God in heaven, he beheld there "seven lamps of fire burning before the throne." Revelation 4:5. He saw an angel "having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne." Revelation 8:3. Here the prophet was permitted to behold the first apartment of the sanctuary in heaven; and he saw there the "seven lamps of fire" and "the golden altar," represented by the golden candlestick and the altar of incense in the sanctuary on earth. Again, "the temple of God was opened" (Revelation 11:19), and he looked within the inner veil, upon the holy of holies. Here he beheld "the ark of His testament," represented by the sacred chest constructed by Moses to contain the law of God...Great. Controversy. pg. 415 We saw above that this consecration of everything included that which is "within the veil" could not have taken place at his second ascension, which was after the eight days, for at his second ascension He began the work in the Holy Place. God the Father did it. He Ordained/Anointed the Lord Jesus and the Heavenly Sanctuary and all that is therein including the Most Holy Place. The Father God and the Third Person of the God Head the Holy Spirit symbolized by the Anointing Oil in the earthly sanctuary. They both Anointed/Ordained the Lord Jesus Christ and the Sanctuary and all that is therein and then as in the typical, they then anointed the priest the sons of the High Priest-Christ Disciples at Pentecost symbolized by the Holy Spirit coming upon them. 1Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light. Ellen White commenting says: “Christ's ascension to heaven was the signal that His followers were to receive the promised blessing. For this they were to wait before they entered upon their work. When Christ passed within the heavenly gates, He was enthroned amidst the adoration of the angels. As soon as this ceremony was completed, the Holy Spirit descended upon the disciples in rich currents, and Christ was indeed glorified, even with the glory which He had with the Father from all eternity. The Pentecostal outpouring was Heaven's communication that the Redeemer's inauguration was accomplished. According to His promise He had sent the Holy Spirit from heaven to His followers as a token that He had, as priest and king, received all authority in heaven and on earth, and was the Anointed One over His people. -Acts of the apostles, chap 4, pp. 39-40 And form Signs of the Times. "When Christ entered within the heavenly gates, He was enthroned, amid the songs of millions of angels. As soon as this ceremony was completed, the Holy Spirit descended upon His followers in rich currents according to Christ's promise, and they were no more orphans. How quickly Christ fulfilled His promise, and sent from the heavenly courts the guarantee of His love! After His inauguration, the Spirit came and Christ was indeed glorified, even with the glory which He had from all eternity with the Father. During His humiliation upon this earth, the Spirit had not descended with all its efficacy; and Christ declared that if He went not away, it would not come, but that if He went away, He would send it. It was a representation of Himself, and after He was glorified it was manifest. {ST, May 17, 1899 par. 3} Inaugurated as King and then Anointed as High Priest. Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high: Heb 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Heb 1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. Christ was Anointed and Inaugurated as the King and sat on His throne at the right hand of the Father before He began His Ministry in Heaven as High Priest. Heb 5:1 For every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins: Heb 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.Heb 5:6 As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. Melchisedec was a King an High Priest and also represented the Holy Spirit. Also some SDA’s suggest that Melchisedec was the Holy Spirit in temporary human form and there is some support for this in EGW’s writings. And it is after His order Melchisedec’s that Christ was Anointed as both King and High Priest. Heb 7:1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him; Heb 7:2 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; Heb 7:3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually. Heb 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. Heb 7:15 And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest, Heb 7:16 Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life. Heb 7:17 For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. Heb 7:22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. Heb 7:23 And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death: Heb 7:24 But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Heb 7:25 Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.Heb 7:26 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; Heb 7:27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself. Heb 7:28 For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore. He was not just a High Priest but a King, God the Son, the Eternal Self-Existing One! And because of His Love for us He became obedient until death to pay the penalty for His own eternal Law. He paid the wages and redeemed humanity from death by the ransom of His own beautiful Life as the King of Glory. Ellen White says these inspired comments concerning the event. “Jesus, the Majesty of heaven, the royal King of heaven, laid aside His royalty, left His throne of glory, His high command, and came into our world to bring to fallen man, weakened in moral power and corrupted by sin, aid divine. . . . {AH 481.1} "By His life and His death, Christ has achieved even more than recovery from the ruin wrought through sin. It was Satan's purpose to bring about an eternal separation between God and man; but in Christ we become more closely united to God than if we had never fallen. In taking our nature, the Saviour has bound Himself to humanity by a tie that is never to be broken. Through the eternal ages He is linked with us. "God so loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son." John 3:16. He gave Him not only to bear our sins, and to die as our sacrifice; He gave Him to the fallen race. To assure us of His immutable counsel of peace, God gave His only-begotten Son to become one of the human family, forever to retain His human nature. This is the pledge that God will fulfill His word. "Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon His shoulder." God has adopted human nature in the person of His Son, and has carried the same into the highest heaven. It is the "Son of man" who shares the throne of the universe. It is the "Son of man" whose name shall be called, "Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." Isa. 9:6. The I Am is the Daysman between God and humanity, laying His hand upon both. He who is "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners," is not ashamed to call us brethren. Heb. 7:26; 2:11. In Christ the family of earth and the family of heaven are bound together. Christ glorified is our brother. Heaven is enshrined in humanity, and humanity is enfolded in the bosom of Infinite Love." "The King of glory stooped low to take humanity. Rude and forbidding were His earthly surroundings. His glory was veiled, that the majesty of His outward form might not become an object of attraction. He shunned all outward display. Riches, worldly honor, and human greatness can never save a soul from death; Jesus purposed that no attraction of an earthly nature should call men to His side. Only the beauty of heavenly truth must draw those who would follow Him. The character of the Messiah had long been foretold in prophecy, and He desired men to accept Him upon the testimony of the word of God." Desire of Ages 19-27. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.