Time that the dead should be Judged

[Kevin H]

2 hours ago, Samie said:

Sadly, what you pointed out to me are NOT Scriptures, are they? Where? What verse or verses?

I thought it was Hebrews 6:19 and 20, and if discussing the words of the text is not Bible then what on earth do you consider Bible?

[Samie]

9 hours ago, Kevin H said:

I thought it was Hebrews 6:19 and 20, and if discussing the words of the text is not Bible then what on earth do you consider Bible?

I thought you understood me. If you can't even understand me, then how could you understand Scriptures?

[Samie]

Hi Kevin;

2 hours ago, Samie said:

I thought you understood me. If you can't even understand me, then how could you understand Scriptures?

No wonder when Scriptures in Heb 6:19, 20 say that Jesus has entered the MHP, you understood Scriptures saying Jesus will enter the MHP.

Quote

NAS Hebrews 6:19-20   This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, a hope both sure and steadfast and one which enters within the veil,  where Jesus has entered as a forerunner for us, having become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.

 

[Kevin H]

Ok, let's go over this again. If I understand correctly, you claim that Hebrews 6:19 and 20 shows that Christ went within the veil for the day of atonement. Thus it cannot apply to 1844.

However, the Author had two different possible ways of wording that Jesus went within the veil, because the Septuagint has two different ways of talking about the high priest going with in the veil.

One term was used for the high priest going behind the veil for the day of atonement.

The other term was used for the high priest going behind the veil to inaugurate the sanctuary or the temple.

The author of Hebrews choose the term that means to inaugurate the temple. He did NOT choose the term for going in on the day of atonement.

Because he choose the one term and did not choose the term you wish he had said you say this was not Biblical and that your interpretation is Biblical.

 

[Samie]

The book of Hebrews was written long before 1844, and it says in 6:19, 20 that Jesus has entered the MHP. But Kevin understood Heb 6:19, 20 as saying Jesus will enter the MHP in 1844. And he seems to want me to swallow his understanding hook line, and sinker.

[Samie]

3 minutes ago, Kevin H said:

Ok, let's go over this again. If I understand correctly, you claim that Hebrews 6:19 and 20 shows that Christ went within the veil for the day of atonement.

That means you did not really understand me. Where in all of my posts in this forum did I say that Jesus went within the veil for the day of atonement?

[Samie]

6 minutes ago, Kevin H said:

However, the Author had two different possible ways of wording that Jesus went within the veil, because the Septuagint has two different ways of talking about the high priest going with in the veil.

One term was used for the high priest going behind the veil for the day of atonement.

The other term was used for the high priest going behind the veil to inaugurate the sanctuary or the temple.

The author of Hebrews choose the term that means to inaugurate the temple. He did NOT choose the term for going in on the day of atonement.

Because he choose the one term and did not choose the term you wish he had said you say this was not Biblical and that your interpretation is Biblical.

Can you tell me the verse or verses in the Bible where the two terms you are referring to are mentioned? Thanks.

[Kevin H]

4 minutes ago, Samie said:

Hi Kevin;

No wonder when Scriptures in Heb 6:19, 20 say that Jesus has entered the MHP, you understood Scriptures saying Jesus will enter the MHP.

 

You clearly misunderstood me. I know that Hebrews 6:19-20 says that Jesus HAS ENTERED the Most Holy Place. No where do I say that the text says that he "Will enter"  Thus you are misrepresenting me.

What I am saying is that there were two different times when the high priest has entered the Most Holy Place. First at the inauguration of the system and second on the day of atonement. While you can argue from the Hebrew, in the Septuagint they use two different terms to make clear which one of these two enterings of the Most Holy Place  they were talking about. The Author of Hebrews could have used one phrase to say that Jesus entered the Most Holy Place to inaugurate the heavenly temple. Or he could have used the other phrase to say that Jesus entered the Most Holy Place for the day of atonement ministry.

Having these two choices he decided to choose the phrase for entering the Most Holy Place to inaugurate the temple and start the heavenly ministry. You are saying things that indicate that you are interpreting the text as if the author of Hebrews choose the words that he did not choose.

[Samie]

Again, can you tell me the verse or verses where the two different terms are used? Thanks.

[Kevin H]

I'll have to check the exact passages, and as I mentioned while I've studied much of the history and culture, languages are my weak points. I have to hear what the linguists say.

The texts would be in the description of the sanctuary and when they went through inaugurating the sanctuary with blood and oil.

Apparently there are also connections between these passages and the Psalm on the sweetness for brothers to dwell in unity like the oil going down Aaron's beard,  and the feast of Pentecost.  

[Samie]

29 minutes ago, Kevin H said:

I'll have to check the exact passages, . . .

OK, I'll wait for you to specify those passages so we can discuss and deal with them properly. I'll have to hold on to my horses first until you tell me the passages you are referring to.

Till then, brother. Happy Sabbath.

[8thdaypriest]

If I understand where Samie and Kevin are coming from,

Samie believes that Christ fulfilled the all of the Day of Atonement types WHEN He died and then entered the presence of God the Father.  

Kevin believes Christ entered the MHP in 1844, to begin a pre-advent "investigative judgment". 

I have an entirely DIFFERENT view.  I do believe that Jesus entered "heaven itself" - the true Tabernacle - to present Himself before the throne of God the Father.  He did this on the day he was resurrected - the Feast of Firstfruits.  He WAS the firstfruits offering - presented before God. 

He was not inaugurated to begin His priestly ministry until Pentecost.  He remained on earth for 40 days (except for the initial trip to present himself on FOFF).  When He ascended from the Mt of Olives there was a welcoming ceremony.  Then He had to complete the 8 day consecration (See Leviticus Cpt 8) which required He remain within the Tabernacle (Heaven itself).  He was glorified on the 8th day of that consecration, and BECAME our High Priest.  The sign of His consecration was the outpouring of His spirit upon His waiting disciples. 

He could NOT have acted as our High Priest until Pentecost.   The Day of Atonement requires a High Priest to stand before God (representing in His person the people of Israel). 

 

[Samie]

2 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

He could NOT have acted as our High Priest until Pentecost.   The Day of Atonement requires a High Priest to stand before God (representing in His person the people of Israel). 

Only the High Priest can offer sacrifices at Yom Kippur. Christ already acted as High Priest when He offered Himself. I think He would be guilty of usurpation of authority had He offered Himself  as supreme sacrifice for sin while NOT yet High Priest.

[8thdaypriest]

4 hours ago, Samie said:

Only the High Priest can offer sacrifices at Yom Kippur. Christ already acted as High Priest when He offered Himself. I think He would be guilty of usurpation of authority had He offered Himself  as supreme sacrifice for sin while NOT yet High Priest.

So you're saying that Christ WAS our High Priest when He died?  AND He was "the Lamb". 

When did He become our High Priest?  You're saying that the child Jesus, in Mary's arms - was already our High Priest?  

Hebrews 2:17  "Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren in all things, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people." (NAU)

[Kevin H]

8thdaypriest: from a quick reading it appears that we are on the same train of thought.

[Samie]

13 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

So you're saying that Christ WAS our High Priest when He died?  AND He was "the Lamb". 

Yes. He is both the sacrificial Lamb and the officiating High Priest:

Quote

ESV Hebrews 7:27 He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself.

 

13 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

When did He become our High Priest?

When the Father declared His Son as High Priest in the order of Melchizedek:

Quote

ESV Psalm 110:4 The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind, "You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek."

ESV Hebrews 5:5-6   So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, "You are my Son, today I have begotten you";  as he says also in another place, "You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek."

 

[Samie]

8 hours ago, Kevin H said:

8thdaypriest: from a quick reading it appears that we are on the same train of thought.

 

On 17/06/2016 at 7:32 PM, Samie said:

Can you tell me the verse or verses in the Bible where the two terms you are referring to are mentioned? Thanks.

On 17/06/2016 at 7:59 PM, Kevin H said:

I'll have to check the exact passages, . . .

Are you ready with the Scriptures I was requesting, Kevin?

[JoeMo]

Just using common sense, and looking at what our pioneers claimed to have happened in 1844 and what has actually transpired since then, it is easy to conclude that 1844 and so many things that go with it (like "day-for-a-year", the historicist/preterist viewpoint on eschatology, and the papacy being the antichrist), are erroneous interpretations of the Word.  One doesn't need to carefully dissect every word in scripture concerning this.

Besides, isn't this topic about when the dead are judged?

[Kevin H]

2 hours ago, Samie said:

 

Are you ready with the Scriptures I was requesting, Kevin?

I have not forgotten you Samie, just trying to juggle you among health issues in the family and work . right now I need to get some time to review information that I have not memorized.

[Samie]

4 hours ago, Kevin H said:

I have not forgotten you Samie, just trying to juggle you among health issues in the family and work . right now I need to get some time to review information that I have not memorized.

Ohh, sorry if I appeared to be hurrying you up. Take your time, brother. I'll just wait.

[8thdaypriest]

Samie,

I don't recall a stated TIME for God the Father's pronouncement/prophecy "you are a priest forever".  Exactly WHEN was the pronouncement spoken?

The Father did NOT SAY, you are now a priest, and will be a priest forever".  Did He? 

David was anointed king - by Samuel, but he did not actually begin to reign as king over a united Israel for another 7 years.  He began to rule over a united Israel in the 8th year.  There's that #8 again.  Co-incidence?  I think not.  Just so.  Christ could have been anointed to become High Priest, but did not actually begin to SERVE as High Priest until after his resurrection, then ascension, then consecration ceremony. 

 Also - the word "forever" has never been clearly translated/defined.  Most think it means "unto the age" - which would mean til the END of the age.  Then you have to define "age".  The word forever is kinda murky, which is why the words are added - "without end". 

[8thdaypriest]

16 hours ago, Kevin H said:

8thdaypriest: from a quick reading it appears that we are on the same train of thought.

Hi Kevin.  Yes - I agree with many things taught within Adventism.  I agree with the 1000 year millennium, during which this earth will be uninhabited - "without form and void".  I agree that the scapegoat symbolized Satan.  I agree that the Tabernacle was a crude "copy" of Heaven itself. 

I do NOT AGREE that Christ entered the MHP forum of Heaven, for the final judgment of Israel - in the person of the High Priest, on October 22nd, 1844.  That one makes no sense to me - that it would take Christ 175+ years to remember (figure out) which sheep belong to Him. 

I believe that Christ will go before the Heaven "court" just before the 7th trumpet sounds.  The things happening on the earth in Daniel's vision, when the "court" sits in Heaven - I believe - tell us this is down at the END of this age. 

[Samie]

13 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I don't recall a stated TIME for God the Father's pronouncement/prophecy "you are a priest forever". 

I quoted Ps 110:4, written long before Christ's first advent. The verse says "the Lord has sworn". Seems past tense to me, that is, the Father's act of declaring His Son as High Priest occurred PRIOR to the writing of Ps 110:4.

[8thdaypriest]

When are "the dead" judged? 

The word "judged" can refer to the decision phase (guilty or innocent) AND it can refer to the execution phase.  In the West we say that a man is "executed" when he is hanged.  But we could legitimately say he is "judged" when he is hanged.  He hears the sentence once again, and judgment is executed. 

Daniel 12:1 "At that time Michael, the great prince, the protector of your people, shall arise. There shall be a time of anguish, such as has never occurred since nations first came into existence. [This would be the 7 last plagues.] But at that time your people shall be delivered, everyone who is found written in the book. 2 Many [multitudes] of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 Those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever." (NRS)

Multitudes are resurrected on THAT DAY. 

The redeemed will be raised to everlasting life, and will "shine" like Christ in His resurrected state. 

The wicked [those knowingly confirmed in their rejection/resistance of the Spirit of God] will be resurrected to HEAR condemnation pronounced against them.  Then they will physically DIE again, either in the 7 last plagues, or from the "brightness of His coming".  I personally - see absolutely NO POINT in resurrecting them AGAIN, to hear judgment pronounced against them AGAIN, to be executed physically AGAIN.  That makes our God out to be a tormentor.  I don't believe it. 

But THIS SCENARIO means folks would have to rethink their doctrine concerning "the rest of the dead". 

See - I don't believe "the rest" are the WICKED from 6000 years since Adam sinned.  I believe "the rest" will be all of those who lived and died in ignorance.  I would even include those who would have chosen Christ, IF they just had a little more information, and a little more time.  Jesus will not leave them behind - as if they never existed.  He will resurrect them - after the 1000 years.  A consecrated priesthood will then be ready to teach them "the ways of the LORD".  (All of those raised at the SC will become that priesthood.  They will become what Ancient Israel was originally intended to be.)  They will "rule the nations" - with Christ. 

So - the TIME for the dead to be judged (to hear judgment pronounced, and then either suffer execution or receive reward) - will be AT THE SECOND COMING. 

For more information please go to: 

http://prophecyviewpoint.com/htdocs/Book Chapters/13-Judgment Day.pdf

http://prophecyviewpoint.com/htdocs/Book Chapters/14-Gog and Magog.pdf

http://prophecyviewpoint.com/htdocs/Book Chapters/15-Final Judgment, Lake of Fire.pdf

At Gog-Magog, God will defend His Israel from an army of (very alive) enemies under the leadership of Satan.  See - the priesthood will not be able to convince everyone from "the rest of the dead".  In fact - the majority of "the rest" will choose to rebel against the rule of Christ. 

[Dave Watchman]

I'm a little surprised by how some of the posters deviate from the standard SDA doctrine. Certain items to me just seem like a basic understanding of the prophetic time periods that they just go without saying. Like 70 weeks that started in 457 BC and 2300 years that ended in 1844, I have zero doubt that 1260 years ended in 1798 and that the dead wouldn't be judged until 1844.

 

"There is an appointed time for everything. And there is a time for every event under heaven—

 

On 6/12/2016 at 5:12 AM, Samie said:

If Jesus entered the MHP only in 1844, would you please try to reconcile that with the Biblical statement in the book of Hebrews that Jesus has already entered within the veil? The book of Hebrews was written long before 1844.

I'm not sure I'm going to be able to do that. I'm not sure I understand the question. Who said Jesus entered the MHP only in 1844? If this is something from an EW vision I'm not sure I'm qualified to comment on it.

Quote

The phrase within the veil (or vail) can easily be shown from Scriptures as referring to the Most Holy Place.

 

Are you saying that Jesus began judging the dead in Hebrews 6? I seriously doubt that. I don't think Peter, Paul, or any of the NT writers with the exception of John near the end of his life could have had an understanding of Daniel 8. There's no way that they could have known about 1844. Similarly, I don't think anyone living in 1844 could have an understanding of the abomination of desolation. Even if they were shown it in a vision it may have caused them too much stress to deal with it at that time.

 

Paul was telling people not to buy anything and not to get married because he thought the second coming was near. I don't know if it was because Daniel was still sealed or if the knowledge was purposefully being hidden from them for their own good. It might have broke their hearts if they knew Jesus wasn't coming back for a couple thousand years. But if the writer of Hebrews or any of the disciples at the time of the authorship of the NT had an understanding of Daniel, they would have known that there was no chance that Jesus could return until after 2300 years had transpired since the command to restore Jerusalem in 457BC.

 

70 weeks are 490 years. Ten cycles of Jubilee. 49+49+49+49+49+49+49+49+49+49=490 years where the 50th year of Jubilee also becomes year # 1 of the following cycle. Jesus confirmed 457 BC by being cut off in the middle of the week. This also confirms the day for year translation of this particular prophetic time. Since 70 weeks are chathak or cut off, they have to be cut off from a larger duration of time. You can't cut 70 weeks off of a blood moon and we can't cut 490 years off from 2300 days.

 

1844 looks right to me.

 

"You too be patient; strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is near. Do not complain, brethren, against one another, so that you yourselves may not be judged; behold, the Judge is standing right at the door. - James