Sanctuary

[tall73]

Nah, let's try not to keep arguing this point tall73.

You're trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip, and I'm sorry it ain't workin. In Numerous statements, Ellen White acknowledges Miller's misunderstanding and error. Yet, what she said on the 1843 chart is a different ball of wax. Don't get the two confused, and you'll be much safer.

The reason why the "figures" were just as God wanted them was because 1843 was the termination of the 1335 year prophecy, where a blessing would be pronounced upon those who made it through the experience, from 1843-1844. She did not say "what was stated about those figures were just as God wanted them". She said the FIGURES!

Let's see what she said:

I saw that God was in the proclamation of the time in 1843. It was His design to arouse the people and bring them to a testing point, where they should decide for or against the truth.

Despite your statements above it is quite clear what the proclamation of time in 1843 involved. It was Miller's message that Jesus was coming around the year 1843. she says God was in it.

It was His desire to TEST THEM. Test them how?

I saw the people of God joyful in expectation, looking for their Lord. But God designed to prove them. His hand covered a mistake in the reckoning of the prophetic periods. Those who were looking for their Lord did not discover this mistake, and the most learned men who opposed the time also failed to see it. God designed that His people should meet with a disappointment.

There is no way around this. He designed that they should be met with disappointment. Over what? Over Jesus not coming as Miller preached.

That was the message that God DESIGNED to prove them by.

Who's hand covered the mistake? God's, according to Ellen White.

There is no doubt what the message was, or that it was from God:

Yet God accomplished His own beneficent purpose in permitting the warning of the judgment to be given just as it was. The great day was at hand, and in His providence the people were brought to the test of a definite time, in order to reveal to them what was in their hearts. The message was designed for the testing and purification of the church. They were to be led to see whether their affections were set upon this world or upon Christ and heaven. They professed to love the Saviour; now they were to prove their love. Were they ready to renounce their worldly hopes and ambitions, and welcome with joy the advent of their Lord? The message was designed to enable them to discern their true spiritual state; it was sent in mercy to arouse them to seek the Lord with repentance and humiliation.

The message was about the Advent. The message was designed. It was a test.

It is plain as day what she is saying. You just do not like it.

[John317]

... To understand one must use the proper rules and I don't see many here using those rules.

If we listen to your rules, we would believe that it was "a tongue" rather than "tongues" in Acts 2: 3, and that it was Satan, and not the Holy Spirit, who fell on the disciples on the day of Pentecost.

Your "proper rules" also mean that we would need to reject all of Paul's letters, in addition to Mark, Luke, Acts, James, Jude, First Peter, Second Peter, and the book of Hebrews.

I know who wants us to follow those kinds of rules.

[tall73]

She did not say "what was stated about those figures were just as God wanted them". She said the FIGURES!

Incorrect.

I have seen that the 1843 chart was directed by the hand of the Lord, and that it should not be altered; that the figures were as He wanted them; that His hand was over and hid a mistake in some of the figures, so that none could see it, until His hand was removed.

First she says that the chart was directed by the hand of the Lord.

Then she references the figures.

The mistake is in other texts directly related to the coming of Jesus, and was said to be a test.

[John317]

...

Yet God accomplished His own beneficent purpose in permitting the warning of the judgment to be given just as it was. The great day was at hand, and in His providence the people were brought to the test of a definite time, in order to reveal to them what was in their hearts. The message was designed for the testing and purification of the church. They were to be led to see whether their affections were set upon this world or upon Christ and heaven. They professed to love the Saviour; now they were to prove their love. Were they ready to renounce their worldly hopes and ambitions, and welcome with joy the advent of their Lord? The message was designed to enable them to discern their true spiritual state; it was sent in mercy to arouse them to seek the Lord with repentance and humiliation.

The message was about the Advent. The message was designed. It was a test.

OK, yes, that's right, it was a test.

As Lysimachus said, you're apparently trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip.

[John317]

What is your main objection to the Investigative Judgment? Is it that God was testing His people in 1843? Is it that Hebrews 1: 3 says Christ made purification of our sins and then took His seat at God's right hand?

[Lysimachus]

Originally Posted By: Lysimachus

Nah, let's try not to keep arguing this point tall73.

You're trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip, and I'm sorry it ain't workin. In Numerous statements, Ellen White acknowledges Miller's misunderstanding and error. Yet, what she said on the 1843 chart is a different ball of wax. Don't get the two confused, and you'll be much safer.

The reason why the "figures" were just as God wanted them was because 1843 was the termination of the 1335 year prophecy, where a blessing would be pronounced upon those who made it through the experience, from 1843-1844. She did not say "what was stated about those figures were just as God wanted them". She said the FIGURES!

Let's see what she said:

I saw that God was in the proclamation of the time in 1843. It was His design to arouse the people and bring them to a testing point, where they should decide for or against the truth.

[tall73]

Being an Ex-Seventh-Day Adventist minister is not going to save you, because it is apparent you know very little about the Investigative Judgment.

[tall73]

Originally Posted By: tall73

Now we turn to your quite lengthy cut and paste job.

For the record, I took out 3 hours of my time typing that whole thing. It is not online. I typed it out directly from the notes, and paid considerable attention to grammar, spelling, and formatting.

Thank you for clarifying.

Next time summarize! It would be easier for both of us.

[tall73]

This was an exception. But it does not prove your point.

[Lysimachus]

Tall73,

To be honest, I really wouldn't mind if this thread gets shut down. I'd rather discuss in a thread dedicated to the topic we are discussing. Here Plley came in here to get HELP in understanding the sanctuary doctrine, and you came here to not give her the answers she is looking for, but to convince her that it is wrong all together. It appears you took advantage of it to trash it in a thread that negative remarks toward the IJ were not meant to be made.

[tall73]

Originally Posted By: tall73

...

Yet God accomplished His own beneficent purpose in permitting the warning of the judgment to be given just as it was. The great day was at hand, and in His providence the people were brought to the test of a definite time, in order to reveal to them what was in their hearts. The message was designed for the testing and purification of the church. They were to be led to see whether their affections were set upon this world or upon Christ and heaven. They professed to love the Saviour; now they were to prove their love. Were they ready to renounce their worldly hopes and ambitions, and welcome with joy the advent of their Lord? The message was designed to enable them to discern their true spiritual state; it was sent in mercy to arouse them to seek the Lord with repentance and humiliation.

The message was about the Advent. The message was designed. It was a test.

OK, yes, that's right, it was a test.

As Lysimachus said, you're apparently trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip.

No blood. No turnip.

You admitted it was a test.

However, you are fine with Ellen White and Miller passing the test by ignoring the words of Jesus.

And you are fine with every single minister who pointed out Jesus' words to them being condemned for correctly applying Jesus' words.

You are fine with your interpretation of the first angel's message being a false message that goes against the words of Christ.

[tall73]

What is your main objection to the Investigative Judgment? Is it that God was testing His people in 1843? Is it that Hebrews 1: 3 says Christ made purification of our sins and then took His seat at God's right hand?

Are you addressing this to me?

[John317]

Yes, I am. Did you ever accept it, practice it and preach it as an SDA pastor? If so, what made you change your mind?

[tall73]

Yep, God did design it. And shame on all people who refuse to be hewed and squared by that judgment hour message. What if God HAD come? Hmm??

What if?

I doubt you even consider that possibility.

[tall73]

You're reading into things you shouldn't. I never said Ellen White never said the message was from God. I was specifically addressing the statement you made about that God allowed the figures to be as He wanted them. She never once said "the message that Jesus was coming in 1843 was correct". Lead by God? Yes. Correct? Partially correct.

God was involved in the message because it was partially correct.

God never once told John the Baptist that He wasn't coming to establish an earthly throne. He had ample time to do so while John the Baptist was in prison. But he didn't.

While He made things clear to His disciples, His disciples did not get it, just like William Miller did not fully get what the cleansing of the sanctuary meant in Jesus's words.

The entire Christian world was built on a GREAT DISAPPOINTMENT --not only of the disciples, but of the people. They missed certain words of Jesus, just like Miller missed certain concepts from God's Word to get the full picture. But He allowed it to happen for a reason--a learning lesson.

[tall73]

Tall73,

To be honest, I really wouldn't mind if this thread gets shut down. I'd rather discuss in a thread dedicated to the topic we are discussing. Here Plley came in here to get HELP in understanding the sanctuary doctrine, and you came here to not give her the answers she is looking for, but to convince her that it is wrong all together. It appears you took advantage of it to trash it in a thread that negative remarks toward the IJ were not meant to be made.

By all means then, continue personal attacks. Perhaps you will get your wish.

However, my comments are actually quite on topic to what he asked. It just doesn't agree with your view.

[tall73]

Yes, I am. Did you ever accept it, practice it and preach it as an SDA pastor? If so, what made you change your mind?

I did preach it as an Adventist minister.

It was actually a rather lengthy process of deciding I could not preach it any longer. Reading in Hebrews showed some issues. The context issue of Daniel occurred to me. I didn't at first let it bother me, but just kind of looked at it now and then. However, after a while I started studying it for a period of about a year and a half while doing the usual ministry things at the same time.

I did not at first consult books but just the Bible. Then I read Adventist works, hoping to find some solution. Finally I could not find any solution there. After some time I read books on the other side, but by that point I had already reached a decision.

[ClubV12]

Seventh Day,

"God bless you in your decision not to preach 'ij'."

From that comment, Seventh Day, I take it you don't believe in the Investigative Judgment?

[Naomi]

Quote:

But taken seriously or rebutted responsibly by a single SDA as yet? No! Not that I know of.

Nor shall I. God Bless you

[ClubV12]

"Lord showed me knowledge "MORE FULLY..."

I myself have little interest in "rebutting" former Seventh-day Adventists who have rejected such fundamental beliefs as the Investigative Judgment and are of the opinion they have greater light than the Adventist Church. There is nothing left to debate, present truth, the first angels message, has been rejected.

"False sympathy must die. It commenced in heaven at the fall of Satan, and has existed ever since. This sympathy has blunted the straight testimony. It pleases Satan well."

Manuscript Releases, Volume 15, 336

[Dr. Rich]

"Lord showed me knowledge "MORE FULLY..."

I myself have little interest in "rebutting" former Seventh-day Adventists who have rejected such fundamental beliefs as the Investigative Judgment and are of the opinion they have greater light than the Adventist Church. There is nothing left to debate, present truth, the first angels message, has been rejected.

"False sympathy must die. It commenced in heaven at the fall of Satan, and has existed ever since. This sympathy has blunted the straight testimony. It pleases Satan well."

Manuscript Releases, Volume 15, 336

"Walk while you have the light, that darkness may not overtake you; he who walks in the darkness does not know where he goes.." John 12:35

Truth keeps moving--even EGW said something like there are MANY, MANY things to give up in order to learn NEW truth.

Those stuck in the OLD truth are now lost in darkness.

[ClubV12]

Satan came to the angels with no complaints about the Government of God, but he suggested he had a better plan. He had studied his ideas for years and researched them exhaustively, his knowledge had grown and he had something new to teach them. It was time to break away from the organization and setup a new one. He needed their sympathy, understanding and support to carry out his plan and a third of the angels joined him, convinced they "more fully" understood the new organization plan better than the others.

[Dr. Rich]

Club, what EGW and you wrote above is only an assumption--it is NOT fact.

[ClubV12]

As we near the end more and more will come saying they "more fully" understand the truth, they have new light to offer, they will encourage Gods people to break free of the old rules and laws. The same refrain repeated in the hippie movement, get hip, get in the groove, tune in, the wording changed to fit the need.

I will NOT bless them, I will NOT offer them false sympathy, they are drunk on a wine they call new truth. You are not helping a recovering alcoholic by offering him a drink because you feel sorry for him. Bless his heart, but how? By giving him the straight facts, not lieing to him and taking away his false hope.

Those who have had great light, rejected it and now come claiming new light are wolves in sheep clothing.

[Dr. Rich]

What then do you think the meaning of Matthew 24:45 is all about Club?