Phoenix is Resurrected

[Gregory Matthews]

In ancient Greek mythology, the Phoenix is a long lived bird who knows that its death in near.  I builds a nest, sets itself on fire and is destroyed.  But, from those ashes that remain, a new young Phoenix arises and begins the cycle again which continues to be repeated.

The One Project leaders, after years of controversy, which many thousands of people attended, sensed that its end had come.  Its leadership was weary of the attacks, often by people who had not personally experienced it.   The pressure of the personal obligations that its leaders had assumed in financing the costs associated with a multi-day conference in which 1,000 + people attended had taken a toll on those leaders.  So, the plug was pulled.  The meetings ended and the leaders attempted to settle back into a less stressful life.

But, such was not to be.  This week a small meeting was held in a SDA church.  Out of that meeting, the One Project has been resurrected.  The Phoenix has stretched its wings and is flying again.  As a young bird,  it has morphed into a creature that is slightly different.    It is expected that in the future it will be centered in SDA  congregations rather than at hotel conference centers.  Other changes are taking back.  But, the Phoenix flys again.

See:

https://spectrummagazine.org/news/2019/jesus-returns-or-one-project-back

 

2/25/2019  NOTE:  I have given further research to this subject.  It is possible that someone reading that above, might think that the rebirth of The One Project is further developed than it actually is.  In actuality the above probably represents the desire of the future that came out of that meeting, however, this is in the developmental stage and it remains to be seen how it actually develops--GM.

 

[JoeMo]

I hope One Project comes back to the Denver area.  I loved it last time it was here.

[Kevin H]

mmmmm, reminds me of Revelation 11 where when the one project died many in our church who were critical of it were rejoicing over it's death...

[Gregory Matthews]

2/25/2019  NOTE:  I have given further research to this subject.  It is possible that someone reading that above, might think that the rebirth of The One Project is further developed than it actually is.  In actuality the above probably represents the desire of the future that came out of that meeting, however, this is in the developmental stage and it remains to be seen how it actually develops --GM.

[hch]

On ‎2‎/‎24‎/‎2019 at 1:02 AM, Kevin H said:

mmmmm, reminds me of Revelation 11 where when the one project died many in our church who were critical of it were rejoicing over it's death...

There is to be a false revival before the real deal. The challenge is to discern if the One Project (that was born outside of Adventism and brought into the fold) is the real deal or that charismatic counterfeit that is to deceive the masses. 

[Gregory Matthews]

Certainly it is correct that one should always ask whether a message is from God, or whether it is intended to deceive.

However, the statement to the effect that TOP came from outside of Adventism is false.   The story of the beginnings of TOP has been published and is well known by all who are interested in such.  

In truth, it might be said that TOP is not perfect today and that it has not been perfect in its past.  No human agency is perfect.

Earlier today (2/25/2019)  I contacted a One Project leader in relation to a criticism made about TOP,  by a person who had attended a One Project meeting.  I have already received a response.  TOP considers it to be a valid issue.  TOP intends to put procedures in place to see that this issue does not happen again.  Was this a minor issue?  No.  It was not.  TOP intends to investigate further, to include talking to the person who raised the issue with me.

NOTE:  That person, in compliance with Biblical principles, will talk to TOP leadership and intended to do so prior to talking to me.

It should be noted that TOP has been willing talk to people who have raised issue     with it.  As a matter of fact, TOP has actually spent money in meeting with such people and talking directly to them.  However, on a number of occasions TOP critics have refused to meet with TOP leadership.  those critics have simply wanted to continue to criticize.

 

[JoeMo]

1 hour ago, hch said:

There is to be a false revival before the real deal. The challenge is to discern if the One Project (that was born outside of Adventism and brought into the fold) is the real deal or that charismatic counterfeit that is to deceive the masses. 

Who says that all "charismatic" stuff is bad?  Rev. 4 and 5 sound a lot like a charismatic service to me.  "Charismatic" is not a dirty word.  Not everything charismatic is counterfeit.  As one who has attended a One Project gathering, I can assure you the one I attended was NOT what you consider charismatic.  No one swooning under the power of the Spirit; no running around screaming, no overt healings; just reverent sincere worship and study of the life and actions of Jesus; and how to emulate them in our day and age.

[hch]

Just now, JoeMo said:

Who says that all "charismatic" stuff is bad?  Rev. 4 and 5 sound a lot like a charismatic service to me.  "Charismatic" is not a dirty word.  Not everything charismatic is counterfeit.  As one who has attended a One Project gathering, I can assure you the one I attended was NOT what you consider charismatic.  No one swooning under the power of the Spirit; no running around screaming, no overt healings; just reverent sincere worship and study of the life and actions of Jesus; and how to emulate them in our day and age.

I certainly did not say that all charismatic stuff is bad, But the bad charismatic stuff will certainly deceive many.

[JoeMo]

2 minutes ago, hch said:

I certainly did not say that all charismatic stuff is bad, But the bad charismatic stuff will certainly deceive many.

That is a statement I can agree with.  They never (in my experience) even want to discuss end-time events.  Many of them mistakenly think we are already living in the millennium; and that the church is poised to take over the country and then the world.  I don't buy it - the planet and humanity have to go through "birth pangs" before we are delivered into the Kingdom.  It will be a rough delivery, though.  And they don't even expect it.

I tried to give a Bible study at a charismatic church once on Daniel 7 - 9.  I was cut off halfway through by the pastor; and never allowed to teach or speak at that church again.

[hch]

1 minute ago, JoeMo said:

That is a statement I can agree with.  They never (in my experience) even want to discuss end-time events.  Many of them mistakenly think we are already living in the millennium; and that the church is poised to take over the country and then the world.  I don't buy it - the planet and humanity have to go through "birth pangs" before we are delivered into the Kingdom.  It will be a rough delivery, though.  And they don't even expect it.

I tried to give a Bible study at a charismatic church once on Daniel 7 - 9.  I was cut off halfway through by the pastor; and never allowed to teach or speak at that church again.

Some folks do not realize the meaning of the tearing of the veil in the Temple at Christ's crucifixion. Without that fundamental understanding, they go astray.

[JoeMo]

2 hours ago, hch said:

Some folks do not realize the meaning of the tearing of the veil in the Temple at Christ's crucifixion. Without that fundamental understanding, they go astray.

I agree.  When the Temple veil was torn in two, it represented an end to the separation between the Holy Place and Most Holy Place.  All of the priestly sacrificial duties were done away with, since we now had one Eternal High Priest offering His blood as atonement for our sins.

Hebrews is very clear that the veil was torn and Jesus had immediate direct access to the Father who dwells in the heavenly Holy of Holies.

" But when Christ came as high priest of the good things that are now already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands, that is to say, is not a part of this creation.  He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption.  The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean."Hebrews 9:11-13)

"For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. 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.  Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself." (Heb. 9:24-26)

Hebrews also seems to say that we as Christ's followers have also had access to the Most Holy Place since Christ's ascention into heaven.

"Therefore, brothers and sisters, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body" (Hebrews 10:19-20)

I know EGW says Christ entered to Most Holy Place in 1844; but I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation of how the 1844 date correlates with the above verses in Hebrews.

[Kevin H]

10 hours ago, JoeMo said:

I agree.  When the Temple veil was torn in two, it represented an end to the separation between the Holy Place and Most Holy Place.  All of the priestly sacrificial duties were done away with, since we now had one Eternal High Priest offering His blood as atonement for our sins.

Hebrews is very clear that the veil was torn and Jesus had immediate direct access to the Father who dwells in the heavenly Holy of Holies.

" But when Christ came as high priest of the good things that are now already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands, that is to say, is not a part of this creation.  He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption.  The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean."Hebrews 9:11-13)

"For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. 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.  Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself." (Heb. 9:24-26)

Hebrews also seems to say that we as Christ's followers have also had access to the Most Holy Place since Christ's ascention into heaven.

"Therefore, brothers and sisters, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body" (Hebrews 10:19-20)

I know EGW says Christ entered to Most Holy Place in 1844; but I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation of how the 1844 date correlates with the above verses in Hebrews.

I have heard 3 professors who gave logical explanations which make sense  in correlating the Hebrews text with 1844. They were Atlantic Union College's  John Wood, the late James Valentine and the Seminary's Richard Davidson.

While I was convinced by the evidence they gave I do not have the grasp of the ideas to present them fairly. I can only point out a few of the points I remember. Part is that what the author of Hebrews was doing and what Mrs. White was doing were two different applications and therefore the Hebrews text is insignificant in dealing with 1844.

Jesus did tie together the fall of Jerusalem and the second coming. But the condition was that the gospel was to be spread into all the world. In Romans Paul kept saying that the gospel had indeed been spread to all the world; but he also writes that he hoped to find the time to bring the gospel to Spain. For some reason places like Spain was not considered part of the world that the gospel HAD to go to for Paul. He and probably other apostles had understood Jesus' command to go into all the world as meaning to the JEWISH world. With the conversion of the gentiles it made it a nice idea to maybe bring the gospel to places like Spain, Scandinavia, Japan, that strange part of the world across the ocean that the  Phoenicians had a little bit of contact with but too far away and ships too small to make it a routine destination. Jesus' view of the world and Paul's and other apostles' views were different on this point. And thus 70 AD came, Jerusalem fell and the church was expecting the imminent return of Jesus and had a great disappointment that he did not come.

What went wrong? Was Jesus a false prophet? Is the church wrong? The book of Hebrews was written in neo-platonic thought to answer these questions. (there are a few hits that it might have been written by Paul shortly before his death as he realized that he had too narrow a view of the world and that the gospel would not be spread by the time Jerusalem fell. But more likely it was written by someone after the fall and the great disappointment of 70 AD.) Hebrews pointed out that Jesus' ministry was composed of two parts, just like the temple was composed of two parts. His earthly ministry was like the holy place, and now he is doing a heavenly ministry for us, which corresponds to the most holy.

The book of Hebrews' explanation of the great disappointment of 70 AD did keep the church from falling apart. However it also got the church such a focus on what Jesus is doing for us in heaven that the church started to neglect the fact that Jesus was indeed going to finish his heavenly ministry and return once the gospel is preached into ALL the world. The church thus ended up loosing it's first love. And another book had to be written to counter balance the book of Hebrews; Revelation with it's message that yes Jesus is doing a heavenly ministry, but is also coming again and that the church needs to preach again. (the theme of Revelation is "Preach again!")

Also, Dr. Davidson points out some interesting things in the Hebrew texts. In the Old Testament the high priest would enter into the most holy place on two different occasions: The first time was to inaugurate the ministry of the sanctuary, temple, second temple. The second time was the annual day of atonement. While both enterings use the same Hebrew words, in the Greek translations, such as the Septuagint, used two very different words to clearly distinguish the reasons for entering the most holy place and not confuse them. The Greek word used in Hebrews is NOT the word that the Greek translations use for entering the most holy on the day of Atonement, but it uses the Greek word that the Greek Old Testament translations use for entering to inaugurate  the ministry. Why did the author of Hebrews choose the one Greek word which does NOT mean to enter on the day of Atonement, but which the Greek translations used to differentiate the reasons for entering the most holy place?

Again I wish I could be as clear and convincing in this description as the professors at AUC were but I hope this is helpful.

[hch]

15 hours ago, JoeMo said:

I agree.  When the Temple veil was torn in two, it represented an end to the separation between the Holy Place and Most Holy Place.  All of the priestly sacrificial duties were done away with, since we now had one Eternal High Priest offering His blood as atonement for our sins...

I know EGW says Christ entered to Most Holy Place in 1844; but I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation of how the 1844 date correlates with the above verses in Hebrews.

The tearing of the veil also revealed that the most holy place in the earthly temple was empty. Jeremiah had hidden the ark of the Covenant in  a cave to keep it safe from the Babylonian's. Thus in Christ's Day when the high priest entered the most holy place, he was just going through the motions. As the high priest had become a political appointment of the Romans, he was not fulfilling the ceremonial requirements to atone for the sins of God's people.

Regarding EGW, she was an eye witness as to the activities that were transpiring in heaven. She was there in vision. So a correct Bible study that explains 1844 in relation to Daniel 8:14, Revelation 10 and 14, in conjunction with her testimony are sufficient to understand that the judgment of the dead began 22 October 1844.

[JoeMo]

10 hours ago, Kevin H said:

But more likely it was written by someone after the fall and the great disappointment of 70 AD.)

I did further research on this; and several scholars take this view.  OTOH, not all do, for example, the International Bible Society takes the following position:

"Hebrews must have been written before the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in a.d. 70 because: (1) If it had been written after this date, the author surely would have mentioned the temple’s destruction and the end of the Jewish sacrificial system; and (2) the author consistently uses the Greek present tense when speaking of the temple and the priestly activities connected with it."

I'm no bible history scholar; so I can't say who is right or wrong. Be that as it may, I didn't see how your post tied the verses in Hebrews with 1844.  But I DID appreciate the information.  Thanks!

[JoeMo]

Hi Kevin,

I remain intrigued by your post above.

11 hours ago, Kevin H said:

Jesus' view of the world and Paul's and other apostles' views were different on this point. And thus 70 AD came, Jerusalem fell and the church was expecting the imminent return of Jesus and had a great disappointment that he did not come.

I agree totally with this.  Not only in Jesus' time, but going way back into the OT.  Starting with Adam and Eve, God's people were thinking "regionally", while God (and satan - unfortunately) were thinking globally.

11 hours ago, Kevin H said:

The book of Hebrews' explanation of the great disappointment of 70 AD did keep the church from falling apart.

Other commentators opine that the Book of Hebrews was written specifically to the Jewish Christians of that time period who were severely tempted and pressured to keep the precepts of Judaism (e.g., circumcision and sacrifices) even if they did now follow Christ.  Many Jewish Christians - influenced by the Judaizers - were caught up in the same dilemma that we are as Christians today - salvation by works or salvation by faith.  The writer of Hebrews warns his readers:

"  It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age  and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace." (Heb. 6:4-6)

Given the tenor of the Book of Hebrews, This seems to be saying that if you find the sacrifice and grace of Jesus insufficient to save you and turn to works as a way to "help" Jesus save you, You are rejecting the sufficiency of His great sacrifice.  This sorta foes along with what Paul says in Galatians 5:4:

"You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace."

Just to be sure here, I don't think either Paul or the writer of Hebrews is speaking of the 10 Commandments - those are an eternal moral compass. I think they are talking of the ceremonial law and rabbinic rituals.

Paul and the writer of Hebrews are trying to put the main focus back on Christ - just like the One Project.

[JoeMo]

On 2/26/2019 at 3:53 AM, hch said:

The tearing of the veil also revealed that the most holy place in the earthly temple was empty.

So true.  I never thought of that before.  So the High Priest just entered an empty room lined with gold and "pretended" to go through the blood atonement ceremony?

 

On 2/26/2019 at 3:53 AM, hch said:

So a correct Bible study that explains 1844 in relation to Daniel 8:14, Revelation 10 and 14, in conjunction with her testimony are sufficient to understand that the judgment of the dead began 22 October 1844.

Throwing EGW into the mix, it may be sufficient.  However, when only looking at scripture, I see no evidence that Jesus waited until 1844 to enter the Most Holy Place.  Scripture clearly states He entered it upon His ascension (to me at least).

[B/W Photodude]

1 hour ago, JoeMo said:

So the High Priest just entered an empty room lined with gold and "pretended" to go through the blood atonement ceremony?

Actually, they put a rock in the Most Holy place to stand in place of the ark.

1 hour ago, JoeMo said:

... I see no evidence that Jesus waited until 1844 to enter the Most Holy Place.

So, 1844 was just another year?

I think it was a matter of a shifting of function in 1844 akin to Day of Atonement in the desert sanctuary. Cleansing of the sanctuary has many meanings like many other things in the Bible.

[Lone Ranger]

8 minutes ago, B/W Photodude said:

So, 1844 was just another year?

IMO, yes.

[JoeMo]

1 hour ago, Lone Ranger said:

IMO, yes.

I agree.

[JoeMo]

1 hour ago, B/W Photodude said:

Actually, they put a rock in the Most Holy place to stand in place of the ark.

Interesting.  Is this in the Bible somewhere or just Jewish tradition (not that it would make it false)?

[Lone Ranger]

2 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

Actually, they put a rock in the Most Holy place to stand in place of the ark.

Oh I don't know about that. I would have to have that from a REALLY RELIABLE source.  I may be wrong but I'm fairly confident that the Jews would not desecrate the most sacred relic of Judaism by replacing it with a rock. 

IMO one may be confusing the fact that the temple was built on a rock (hence "Dome of the Rock) or  perhaps confusing the Temple Mount with the Kaaba, which DOES have a rock inside (we're told; I have never seen it personally.)

[B/W Photodude]

1 hour ago, JoeMo said:

Interesting.  Is this in the Bible somewhere or just Jewish tradition (not that it would make it false)?

I knew I had read it somewhere and am amazed I found it so fast! From M L Andreasen's "Sanctuary Service":

[B/W Photodude]

4 hours ago, JoeMo said:

I see no evidence that Jesus waited until 1844 to enter the Most Holy Place.  Scripture clearly states He entered it upon His ascension (to me at least).

Entering the Most Holy Place and beginning the Services of Atonement are two different things. 1844 was a very significant date in Bible prophecy and as one preacher likened it, it was another movement raised up by God. In fact, there have been three movements raised up by God in the history of this earth - the Jewish nation, the Christian Church after Pentacost, and the Seventh-day Adventist church. 

[Lone Ranger]

It's not personal, but I do not accept M L Andreasen as either reliable, authoritative, or unbiased. Rather I would like to see an independent, academic source by a peer-reviewed, recognized Biblical scholar.

3 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

Actually, they put a rock in the Most Holy place to stand in place of the ark.

And even though there may have been a rock in there, I'm pretty sure they didn't put it there to stand-in for the ark.

[JoeMo]

30 minutes ago, B/W Photodude said:

there have been three movements raised up by God in the history of this earth - the Jewish nation, the Christian Church after Pentacost, and the Seventh-day Adventist church. 

I might be wrong, but I believe EGW even said somewhere that God has His people in other denominations as well.  When you say SDA Church, are you talking about card-carrying, church attending members of the denomination in good standing, or those who embrace important parts of the SDA message regardless of denomination  (e.g., that the Sabbath is God's chosen day of worship, that Jesus is coming soon, and things are gonna get worse before we are delivered into the Kingdom)?