Adventist Investigative Judgment

[BobRyan]

Verse 24-25 is describing the entry of Christ into the sanctuary:

Heb 9:24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
Heb 9:25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy places every year with blood of others;

It does not say "nor that he should offer himself ONCE a year" - to single out just one sacrifice in the year. It says "offer OFTEN" - Paul is accounting for ALL the sacrifices during the entire year.

It is still a focus on the "one sacrifice" and not on "the one service to replace all services" as you seem to be straining to get from it.

 

[BobRyan]

The commentaries assume that it is the entry being spoken of because verse 24 is speaking of Christ's entry, and compares it to the entry yearly by the high priest with blood.

Heb 9:3-7 singles out "once a year" to identify the Day of Atonement - By contrast Heb 9:25-28 does not use that identifier and is talking about all sacrifices during the entire year as being compressed/collapsed into 1.

The commentaries miss the entire scope of the Day of Atonement completely - they delete all the function of the High Pries "on day one" with none of the sanctuary service still in action EVEN though Paul says the MAIN POINT is the work of Christ as High Priest in Heaven's sanctuary STILL going on Heb 8:1-5.

That should be a wake-up call.

Matthew Henry-

Hebrews 9 - Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary on the Bible - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.org

Those under the law were the holy places made with hands, which are but figures of the true sanctuary, Hebrews 9:24. Christ's sacrifice, though offered upon earth, was by himself carried up into heaven, and is there presented in a way of daily intercession for he appears in the presence of God for us. He has gone to heaven, not only to enjoy the rest and receive the honour due to him, but to appear in the presence of God for us, to present our persons and our performances, to answer and rebuke our adversary and accuser, to secure our interest, to perfect all our affairs, and to prepare a place for us.

2. From the sacrifices themselves, Hebrews 9:26. Those under the law were the lives and blood of other creatures of a different nature from the offerers--the blood of beasts, a thing of small value, and which would have been of none at all in this matter had it not had a typical respect to the blood of Christ but the sacrifice of Christ was the oblation of himself he offered his own blood, truly called, by virtue of the hypostatical union, the blood of God and therefore of infinite value. 3. From the frequent repetition of the legal sacrifices. This showed the imperfection of that law but it is the honour and perfection of Christ's sacrifice that, being once offered, it was sufficient to all the ends of it and indeed the contrary would have been absurd, for then he must have been still dying and rising again, and ascending and then again descending and dying and the great work had been always in fieri--always doing, and always to do, but never finished, which would be as contrary to reason as it is to revelation, and to the dignity of his person: But now once in the end of the world hath he appeared, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

But that sinks your position. Because the one entry was through the whole sanctuary, as it included the inauguration.

Your point that I do not always agree with William Johnsson's explanation of things - is granted. I do not contest that point. Rather I note the distinctive difference between the distinctive terms used in Heb 9:3-7 to focus on just the one service and just the one sacrifice... vs the very different focus in vs 25-28 to reference all of the sacrifices of the entire year collapsing into one.

 

[BobRyan]

I said:
But collapsing all the function of Priest in the entire Biblical Sanctuary service - into one day -- is not in the text of Heb 7 or 8 or 9.

Of course it is,

you just shot your own argument in the foot.

Heb 8:1-5 "the MAIN Point" according to Paul is that Christ is STILL as of the writing of Heb 8 - functioning/active as High Priest in the Heavenly sanctuary - instead of - not going on anymore, services completed, no more context for High Priest -- the way your suggestions spin this.

or He could not have fulfilled the daily (chapter 7 and 10), the red heifer, ratification, inauguration, and Day of Atonement entry (chapter 9), but He did.

Those references to sacrifices - and to inauguration are already dealt with in this thread
1 all sacrifices collapse into one
2. The inauguration service was on day 1 and was completed by the time of Heb 8 and 9 so no activity there in that one regard. It was past tense.
3. One entry to the sanctuary itself because there is only one sacrifice.

All of those things were fulfilled by His death - but the sacrifice was "offered up" on the cross -- not in the sanctuary and the services of the sanctuary were only started by the time of Heb 7-9 (oher than inauguration) - so then a LOT of activity going on in the Sanctuary and being done in the still-active-role of Christ as high priest IN that sanctuary.

This is irrefutable

 

[BobRyan]

There is no problem because the quote notes that vs. 25 is talking about the entry, not the death.

Heb 9:25-28

25 not that He should offer Himself often,

He "offers" the sin offering "up in smoke" on the cross - once for all.

The offer often of vs 25 and the "Suffer often" and "sacrifice of Himself" of vs 26 and the "offer ONCE to bear the sins of many" of vs 28 -- all refer to the same thing - a once for all sin offering "offered up" on the cross. Not to any specific service pertaining to it.

25 not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another— 26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27 And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, 28 so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.

as we saw here in the following post --

The problem with the suggestion is that it implies that if Christ had to go back to Earth and be crucified for every one of the sacrifices on Earth -- He would only go back for the Day of Atonement sacrifice - which is not even remotely workable into the text of Heb 9.

So for example -- these two demonstrate the problem - as you quote them...

Cambridge Bible:

Entereth into the holy place every year] In this entrance of the High Priest once a year, on the Day of Atonement, into the Holiest Place culminated all that was gorgeous and awe-inspiring in the Jewish ritual.

The Expositor’s Greek Testament

The high priest enters the Holiest annually, but Christ’s entering in was of another kind, not requiring repetition.


==================

Paul is not trying to resolve one sacrifice and entrance "on the Day of Atonement" in Heb 9... but ALL of them!


Heb 7
26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens;
27 who has no daily need, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because He did this once for all time when He offered up Himself.

• To make the case of ONE and not MANY sacrifices as we see in Heb 7:27 it has to be ALL sacrifices including the daily - the text is clear about that.
• Note it is the High Priest - active in the DAILY

Heb 9
24 For Christ did not enter a holy place made by hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; 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. 26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been revealed to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

The focus is "the Holy Place" in Heb 9:25

By contrast -- The focus is the "Most Holy place" in 9:3-7

3 Behind the second veil there was a tabernacle which is called the Most Holy Place, 4 having a golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden jar holding the manna, Aaron’s staff which budded, and the tablets of the covenant; 5 and above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the atoning cover; but about these things we cannot now speak in detail.
6 Now when these things have been so prepared, the priests are continually entering the outer tabernacle, performing the divine worship, 7 but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, not without taking blood which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance.

• To make the case of ONE and not MANY sacrifices as we see in Heb 7:27 it has to be ALL sacrifices including the daily - the text is clear about that.
• And chapter 7 is clear that the High Priest is involved in the daily. The commentaries "assume" in 9:25 that because the High Priest is involved it can only reference one sacrifice - the one on the Day of Atonement.
  
• And 9:3-7 shows specific terms used for "Most Holy Place" in context of the Day of Atonement - and that is not found in 9:25.

=======================================

Collapsing all offerings into - one on the cross -- is in the text.
Collapsing all entry into the sanctuary -- into one -- in the text.

• But collapsing all the function of Priest in the entire Biblical Sanctuary service - into one day -- is not in the text of Heb 7 or 8 or 9.

• What is more - it does not make sense to have a High Priest in heaven with all the priestly services ended - because we could no longer be informed by scripture as to the work of High priest in a sanctuary that has all of its functions ended. He would not actually be doing anything. Yet we are told in Heb 8:1 that "the MAIN POINT" is that we DO have a functioning High Priest in Heaven IN the Sanctuary that God put there - active and functioning.
• The focus of 9:25-28 is on collapsing the sacrifice and entry into the Sanctuary -- into one... where Christ "bears the sins of many" - once - on the cross once. It is not collapsing the sequencing of Holy Place - vs - MHP function into that one day.

Sacrifices offered up on the altar, on the cross --

Heb 7
26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens;
27 who has no daily need, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because He did this once for all time when He offered up Himself

Heb 9:28 so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. (on the cross)

Heb 10:10 By this will, we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all time. (on the cross.)


Heb 9: 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. 26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often (on the cross)

 

[tall73]

Tall73: Of course. As I stated, all the sacrifices are one, all the entries are one. But the way he spells that out is to list various things that Jesus fulfilled throughout the chapter. And one of those refers to the entry with blood by the high priest.

Bob: My earlier response was that both sides agree with this
1. One sacrifice -- on the cross 2. One entry with the blood of that sacrifice into the sanctuary. As Heb 9 points out "The sanctuary" is composed of Holy Place, and Most Holy Place. The inauguration event involves both - that was completed when Christ ascended to heaven.

The "daily" is a two-party process involving BOTH the sinner and the High Priest. There was never a way to get the sinners of all time to 'show up' 2000 years ago and repent or confess or make their plea or claim the blood for forgiveness of some sin.

Before I respond to all of your various posts, I think we are talking past each others, so I want to clarify this first.

Is it your proposal that Jesus has bottles of His stored blood that He uses whenever He takes a priestly action?

The death of the victim needed to be ministered by the priest to complete the sin offering. But Jesus doesn't present blood samples each time that He does a priestly function.

Jesus is alive. He presented HIMSELF in God's presence as the completed sacrifice. That IS the blood work for every sacrifice of every kind throughout the entire type. There won't be any other because His death and entry and presentation in God's presence already happened.

The type, the shadow, shows many blood ministrations by the priest, but the reality only shows one.

The various blood rites in the type, such as placing the blood on the altar for the sin offering, sprinkling of blood on the people for the formation of the covenant, the sprinkling of the blood of the red heifer towards the tent of meeting, etc. were all pointing to the one blood of Jesus. But Jesus doesn't have a blood bank in heaven. He died and then presented Himself, the completed sacrifice in God's presence. There is no more blood work.

There is still priestly ministration. We come to receive the benefits of the historical actions of death, entry and presentation of His completed sacrifice.

Do you think otherwise? Does Jesus have blood sitting by to apply still?

You mention the "daily" being a two party process. Do you think that means Jesus has to apply blood again? Does He have to apply blood to each person to include them in the covenant? They were not born in the first century.

This doesn't make sense. Jesus presented Himself. That is all the blood work needed.

We, who were born later, do confess now. And He applies the BENEFITS of the historic blood work. Jesus' blood, shed and presented in the first century, still cleanses us, even if we were not alive back then.

 

[BobRyan]

Even Adventist scholars have been forced to admit Day of Atonement references:

Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary on Hebrews 10:1:

Compare ch. 9:25, 26, where the work of Christ is again contrasted with that of the earthly high priest on the Day of Atonement.

M.L. Andreasen in The Book of Hebrews:

Verses 25, 26. The priests entered the first apartment daily, the high priest once every year when he went into the most holy with the blood of the bullock and the goat. (127)

William Johnsson in his essay "Day of Atonement Allusions," which can be found in the DARCOM volume on Hebrews, lists 9:25 as clearly alluding to the Day of Atonement.

The context clearly points to a Day of Atonement allusion (high priest . . . yearly . . . blood [cf. 9:7]) (113)
;

Let's begin with the obvious where you and I agree when it comes to these two
1. They all agree with what we have here - all sacrifices collapse into one
2. They all agree with what we have here - that with only one sacrifice there is only one entry into the sanctuary.

These are the two details where everyone pretty much agrees - on both sides of this debate.

3. We also agree that these two in particular agree with me that the service in the Heavenly Sanctuary that is still going on - with Christ as High priest is the Day of Atonement service that began in 1844.
4. We also agree that these two in particular agree with me that at Christ's ascension He began the Holy Place - daily service and that it continued until 1844, and they agree that this is exactly what Paul refers to in Heb 8:1-5 as "the main point" of Christ still being active as High Priest in the still fully-functional Heavenly "sanctuary" as late as Hebrews 8.

you are not posting enough context on their statements in the detail that you are looking for - but for the sake of argument let's say it is as you say - and they are simply being "inconsistent" -- in which case my own statement that I am not going along with the tiny snip quote's apparent meaning above - as something I would agree with - is not too surprising.

But to be fair - I have not been studying "Them" on this subject/topic. Rather I study the Bible so i am not sure they are wrong here -- since they may have some "qualifying" statement in their text. If I had the time to review their full quote I might not dismiss their statement as "a too-hasty mistake on their part" the way I am doing here on this thread. So I am not trying to throw them under the bus - I am just saying I don't mind not going down that road with them in the least - if that is indeed what they mean by that statement.

(And it raises red flags with me since I know they are already firm on points 3 and 4 above.)

 

[BobRyan]

Tall73: Of course. As I stated, all the sacrifices are one, all the entries are one. But the way he spells that out is to list various things that Jesus fulfilled throughout the chapter. And one of those refers to the entry with blood by the high priest.

Entering the sanctuary - "once for all" after having made a once-for-all sacrifice on the cross where Jesus "offered up" the sin offering - is not what I object to. Since it is the basis for every service dealing with the sin offering. But it is not the completion of every service... not even the daily - since the daily service requires two parties according to Heb 9 and Leviticus - not one. The sinner and the High Priest. Obviously 2000 years ago - a lot of not-yet-born-sinners, who would "not be participating" in any sort of two-party transaction.

The "daily" is a two-party process involving BOTH the sinner and the High Priest. There was never a way to get the sinners of all time to 'show up' 2000 years ago and repent or confess or make their plea or claim the blood for forgiveness of some sin.

Before I respond to all of your various posts, I think we are talking past each others, so I want to clarify this first.

Is it your proposal that Jesus has bottles of His stored blood that He uses whenever He takes a priestly action?

No it is my proposal that Jesus refers to the historic fact of his sacrifice - and when a sinner confesses, repents and claims the blood of Christ (in whatever form that might take - no matter how remote) - then the High Priest takes an action - taking the claim of forgiveness and claiming his blood on behalf of the confessing sinner. "Cleansing the conscience from dead works" as Heb 9 points out. It is a two-way-interactive transaction between Christ and the sinner during the life of the sinner. (read... "wayyyy protracted")

There is still priestly ministration.

There is no priestly ministration without a functioning sanctuary. In Heb 8:1-5 it is a fully functioning sanctuary with Christ as high priest.

Delete the sanctuary and there is no more priest.

Do you think otherwise? Does Jesus have blood sitting by to apply still?

Jesus has the historic fact of his sin offering - and as our one mediator pleads His blood on our behalf.

Rev 12: Now the salvation, and the power, and the kingdom of our God and the authority of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brothers and sisters has been thrown down, the one who accuses them before our God day and night. 11 And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of their testimony, and they did not love their life even when faced with death.

You mention the "daily" being a two party process.

As does Paul in Heb 9 and has does the book of Leviticus.

Do you think that means Jesus has to apply blood again? Does He have to apply blood to each person to include them in the covenant? They were not born in the first century.

Entering into the New Covenant requires an act of the will - because not everyone is saved.

John 1:11 "He came to His OWN and His OWN received Him not" - it is not a "given" that all humans will chose the new birth with the "Law of God written on heart and mind" Jer 31:31-34 that we see in the Heb 8:6-12 "New Covenant". Each person must choose for themselves.

 

[tall73]

No it is my proposal that Jesus refers to the historic fact of his sacrifice - and when a sinner confesses, repents and claims the blood of Christ (in whatever form that might take - no matter how remote) - then the High Priest takes an action - taking the claim of forgiveness and claiming his blood on behalf of the confessing sinner.

That sounds a lot like what I stated here:

We, who were born later, do confess now. And He applies the BENEFITS of the historic blood work. Jesus' blood, shed and presented in the first century, still cleanses us, even if we were not alive back then.


We both agree the blood work is in the past in this case, but He applies the benefit of His historically shed blood to the sinner based on faith, confession, etc.

"Cleansing the conscience from dead works" as Heb 9 points out. It is a two-way-interactive transaction between Christ and the sinner during the life of the sinner. (read... "wayyyy protracted")

And it is on the basis of historic death and presentation. Again, this is why I think we are talking past each other. I do not disagree that we come now to Jesus as High Priest to receive the benefits of Jesus' ministration.

Entering into the New Covenant requires an act of the will - because not everyone is saved.

Agreed, and that act of the will happens in our time. And we agree if someone does not endure to the end but later rejects Christ, then they do not benefit from that covenant because they would have rejected the only sacrifice, and would die for their own sins.

But the inclusion in the covenant is based on historic blood work that is not repeated.

You seem to be taking my statements that there are no applications of the merits of Jesus' blood any longer, and that was not the point I was making.

The point I was making was that the blood work of death, entry, presentation before God is finished.

And now when Jesus forgives, or Jesus includes someone in the covenant based on their acceptance of Him, He has already done all that is necessary to accomplish that.

Are we agreed on these points?

 

[tall73]

Let's begin with the obvious where you and I agree when it comes to these two
1. They all agree with what we have here - all sacrifices collapse into one
2. They all agree with what we have here - that with only one sacrifice there is only one entry into the sanctuary.

These are the two details where everyone pretty much agrees - on both sides of this debate.

3. We also agree that these two in particular agree with me that the service in the Heavenly Sanctuary that is still going on - with Christ as High priest is the Day of Atonement service that began in 1844.
4. We also agree that these two in particular agree with me that at Christ's ascension He began the Holy Place - daily service and that it continued until 1844, and they agree that this is exactly what Paul refers to in Heb 8:1-5 as "the main point" of Christ still being active as High Priest in the still fully-functional Heavenly "sanctuary" as late as Hebrews 8.

you are not posting enough context on their statements in the detail that you are looking for - but for the sake of argument let's say it is as you say - and they are simply being "inconsistent" -- in which case my own statement that I am not going along with the tiny snip quote's apparent meaning above - as something I would agree with - is not too surprising.

But to be fair - I have not been studying "Them" on this subject/topic. Rather I study the Bible so i am not sure they are wrong here -- since they may have some "qualifying" statement in their text. If I had the time to review their full quote I might not dismiss their statement as "a too-hasty mistake on their part" the way I am doing here on this thread. So I am not trying to throw them under the bus - I am just saying I don't mind not going down that road with them in the least - if that is indeed what they mean by that statement.

(And it raises red flags with me since I know they are already firm on points 3 and 4 above.)

Unfortunately the Adventist church sells the Hebrews DARCOM volume, rather than giving it away. It would make a lot more sense for them to provide it free online since it was supposed to be a response to the issues raised at Glacier View etc. The only volume I am aware is available online is the first, by Shea, which does not cover the Hebrews material. It only went online when it went out of print for a while.

And copyright does not allow me to post the entire articles referenced.

Davidson's article referenced is from the Seminary studies may still be online.

The reason I posted these is not to contest that they still hold to an Adventist view. The reason I posted was that I wanted you to see that they still admit these are Day of Atonement references.

After that they disagree on some points between each other. However, what they all see that compels them to admit the reference is that the phrase with Kata using distributive usage has a meaning, and it is yearly. And the yearly entry of the high priest is only one thing.

-The inauguration was not yearly.
-The entry for an individual sin offering only happened when the priest sinned, and Jesus does not sin.
-The entry for the sin of the camp was for a specific unknown sinful act by the whole congregation of Israel at a distinct time. That was not yearly, and I am not sure how that would apply in the fulfillment as it would mean all professed believers participating in a specific act, and all believers are not even alive at the same time.

The sin offerings for other individuals did not go into the sanctuary.

So the entry, yearly, by the high priest, with blood, leaves us with the Day of Atonement. And verse 25 is speaking of the Entry, because verse 24 indicates the Entry, and 25 is still relating aspects of it. And then the offer of verse 25 is compared to the entry with blood by the high priest yearly, which is not the death but the presentation of blood.

 

[tall73]

As Heb 9 points out "The sanctuary" is composed of Holy Place, and Most Holy Place.
The inauguration event involves both - that was completed when Christ ascended to heaven.

Which indicates Jesus was not limited to the holy place.

And there is some question where there is a holy place in the fulfillment, as it is heaven itself. The description in 9:1-7 lays out the type, but it also emphasizes the limited access of the earthly. And in the fulfillment that is totally different. We all can come to Jesus directly on the throne.

The "daily" is a two-party process involving BOTH the sinner and the High Priest. There was never a way to get the sinners of all time to 'show up' 2000 years ago and repent or confess or make their plea or claim the blood for forgiveness of some sin.

That part (The Holy Place service) could not be "collapsed". Only the sacrifice and the entrance into the Sanctuary.

Waiting on your follow up to the other post on this one. We agree the act of confessing, etc. happens later by the person.

However, the historic blood work (not just on the cross, but presenting Himself in heaven) already happened. So the blood of the inauguration, ratification of the covenant, etc. was all presented in the person of Christ.

 

[tall73]

Tall73: And moreover, He entered by means of blood, which was not necessary to enter the first compartment, but it was to enter the second.

That statement is not logical - all sin offerings came in through the first compartment - there was no "other" way to get to the Most Holy Place -- and in fact the sin offerings of the daily service never went to the most holy place - until the Day of Atonement.

No, it is not illogical. It states:

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

Yes, you only get to the second by going through the first. But you don't need blood to enter the first. You do to enter the second. And yes, it was only on the Day of Atonement you went to the second. Which means, it was only at one point in the year you were required to bring blood in order to enter somewhere, and that somewhere is the second compartment:

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.

They could regularly go into the first compartment. Only the high priest would go into the Most Holy, and He had to go in the prescribed manner, with blood, on the correct day (yearly).

Lev 16:2 and the LORD said to Moses, “Tell Aaron your brother not to come at any time into the Holy Place inside the veil, before the mercy seat that is on the ark, so that he may not die. For I will appear in the cloud over the mercy seat.
Lev 16:3 But in this way Aaron shall come into the Holy Place: with a bull from the herd for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering.
Lev 16:4 He shall put on the holy linen coat and shall have the linen undergarment on his body, and he shall tie the linen sash around his waist, and wear the linen turban; these are the holy garments. He shall bathe his body in water and then put them on.
Lev 16:5 And he shall take from the congregation of the people of Israel two male goats for a sin offering, and one ram for a burnt offering.
Lev 16:6 “Aaron shall offer the bull as a sin offering for himself and shall make atonement for himself and for his house.
Lev 16:7 Then he shall take the two goats and set them before the LORD at the entrance of the tent of meeting.

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

So the entry once for all is into the second compartment, because it is by means of blood.

"All sacrifices include all--even the Day of Atonement. " - but not "all services" as "one service".

The yearly entry with blood by the high priest is a reference to a single service, just as the sprinkling the people and the book with blood is a reference to one service.

The two-party transactions in the Holy Place could not even happen until the second party "is born" and can choose to take or not take that action.

But the blood work for that is already done.

 

[tall73]

2. Heb 9:25 speaks of year-by-year , every year and refers to all the sacrifices for the entire year being completed in one sacrifice. It does NOT say "once a year" as we see in Heb 9:7 to JUST single out that one sacrifice.

Yearly, year by year, is a reference to every year. Just like daily, day by day, is a reference to every day.

The statement of once a year is describing the type. But the statement in 9:25 is speaking of repeated offerings of Himself as the high priest enters yearly with blood.

This doesn't refer to the death as it is speaking of the entry. And it begins in verse 23.

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,

It is necessary for the heavenly things to be cleansed. This continues discussion of the inauguration from verse 21. But it also leads into verse 24.

The connecting word "For" notes that the necessity of the cleansing is related to the past tense entry of Christ into God's presence, in heaven itself. And verse 25 continues talking about the entry with another connecting word, nor yet was it (entry) to offer Himself repeatedly.

Jesus didn't enter to have to repeatedly present blood. The "repeated" would be in the type when the same entry, the Day of Atonement, once a year entry referenced in verse 7 would then have to be done again the next year, and the next year, and the next year, as it was in the type. Because it was yearly.

But instead Jesus did not enter repeatedly as the high priest does yearly.....because the Day of Atonement entry of the high priest happens yearly in the type.

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,


So when Davidson says:

I agree with Young that Hebrews 9:7 and 9:25 refer to Day of Atonement, because of the clear references to “once a year” and “every year” respectively. ("Inauguration or Day of Atonement?" Andrews University Seminary Studies, Spring 2002 79)

He is noting the parallel to verse 7 because the once a year entry would be done repeatedly, every year, year after year, because it never really took away sins. It only pointed to Jesus' once for all offering that did.

 

[tall73]

The commentaries miss the entire scope of the Day of Atonement completely - they delete all the function of the High Pries "on day one" with none of the sanctuary service still in action EVEN though Paul says the MAIN POINT is the work of Christ as High Priest in Heaven's sanctuary STILL going on Heb 8:1-5.

That should be a wake-up call.

Except this is inaccurate. They see the blood work of death, entry and presentation as finished. They do not (except for some of the Calvinists for obvious reasons), think that Jesus has no role left as Priest.

There will be no more deaths, which we agree on, or entries , which we agree on. And Jesus isn't going to appear before God on our behalf again because that would mean leaving His presence, and He does not leave until the second coming.

The reason this is important is that it means that all the work involving the blood rites, death, entry and presentation of blood in its various forms is already fulfilled in the first century.

That includes the Day of Atonement application of blood. Jesus is not going to die again, not going to enter again, and not going to present blood again. He is just going to apply the already shed and presented blood to those who come to Him to confess, as in the sin offering, to be joined to the covenant, and for those who endure to the end they also benefit from His atoning application of blood fulfilling the Day of Atonement entry, because it is an application of blood to remove the sins of all true believers throughout time. And again, that is not new blood, it is the same blood shed on the cross and presented before God in the first century.

Your point that I do not always agree with William Johnsson's explanation of things - is granted. I do not contest that point. Rather I note the distinctive difference between the distinctive terms used in Heb 9:3-7 to focus on just the one service and just the one sacrifice... vs the very different focus in vs 25-28 to reference all of the sacrifices of the entire year collapsing into one.

No, it is part of the entry, where He offers Himself, but not repeatedly as in the type. And repeatedly is the yearly entry of the high priest on the Day of Atonement that was repeated because it happened "Yearly", year after year, the whole thing started over each year.

But it did not in the fulfillment. Jesus died, entered and presented Himself before God, and now He ministers those merits of the blood to people as they come to Him.

And of course, this is the only way it could work. Because just as you say that some were not born in the first century and so need to enter into confession, the covenant, etc. in their own time. So if Jesus only did the atoning sacrifice for the sins at the end then many would not be alive to "afflict" themselves and appropriate this for themselves as in the type. But because Jesus' blood was shed and presented immediately in the first century, the blood is available to all who come to Him.

Previously faith looked forward to Christ's work through the earthly sanctuary. Now in the new covenant faith looked to Christ's completed blood work, which is the basis of His ongoing high priest ministry.

 

[tall73]

Bob: But collapsing all the function of Priest in the entire Biblical Sanctuary service - into one day -- is not in the text of Heb 7 or 8 or 9.

tall73 said: Of course it is

you just shot your own argument in the foot.

Of course not. Jesus did complete all the blood work for every sacrifice.

Heb 8:1-5 "the MAIN Point" according to Paul is that Christ is STILL as of the writing of Heb 8 - functioning/active as High Priest in the Heavenly sanctuary - instead of - not going on anymore, services completed, no more context for High Priest -- the way your suggestions spin this.

Except this is a misunderstanding of my point, as I have now clarified in the other posts. Jesus continues to conduct High Priestly ministry, but on the basis of completed blood work. There are no more deaths, entries or presentations of blood.

There is only ministering the benefits of the already shed and presented blood.

 

[tall73]

Heb 9:25-28
25 not that He should offer Himself often,
He "offers" the sin offering "up in smoke" on the cross - once for all.

Already explained in the posts above. Verse 25 relates to entry, continuing from verse 24, and is not the death, but the presentation of blood in God's presence in our behalf.

But you have not addressed this text Bob:

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.

You keep asserting that "offer" must mean the death. But that is not how the author of Hebrews used the term in 9:7. He used "offer" of the blood ministration in the sanctuary by the high priest on the Day of Atonement.

The "offer of Jesus in verse 25 is part of the entry:

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

And it is contrasted with the repeated yearly entry of the earthly high priest with blood because the Day of Atonement must be repeated every year.

Jesus presented Himself once before God on our behalf. That is not the death. That is the entry and presentation of blood, just as "offer" was used in 9:7.

 

[BobRyan]

Sacrifices offered up on the altar, on the cross --

Heb 7
26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens;
27 who has no daily need, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because He did this once for all time when He offered up Himself

Heb 9:28 so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. (on the cross)

Heb 10:10 By this will, we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all time. (on the cross.)

Heb 9
24 For Christ did not enter a holy place made by hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;
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.
26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often (on the cross)
since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been revealed to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.
27 And just as it is destined for people to die once, and after this comes judgment, 28 so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, (one the cross)
will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him

Already explained in the posts above. Verse 25 relates to entry, continuing from verse 24, and is not the death

The 9:25-28 and 7:26-27 and 10:10 verses above do not appear to agree with your preference. So ... we differ on that point.

 

[tall73]

tall73 said: Already explained in the posts above. Verse 25 relates to entry, continuing from verse 24, and is not the death

Bob: The 9:25-28 and 7:26-27 and 10:10 verses above do not appear to agree with your preference. So ... we differ on that point.

7:26-27, and 10:10 are their own passage with context.

Verse 25 is connected to 24 describing the entry:

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,

Christ entered into heaven itself to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. That is not the death. That is the entry. Nor was the entry to offer himself repeatedly.

This ties back in to 9:7 where the presentation of blood on the Day of Atonement is described as "offer".

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

The word just means to bear or present, etc. And the presentation in 24-25 is that of Jesus Himself, the completed sacrifice on our behalf, appearing in God's presence for us.

And the whole reason He spelled out the type is to show Jesus' superiority to it and how His sacrifice, entry, and appearance before God on our behalf with His competed sacrifice was completely sufficient, beyond anything in the type.

The reason that in verse 25 Jesus presentation of Himself does not need to be repeated is because He only needed to do it once. This is contrasted with the yearly entry of the high priest with blood. This was done every year, repeatedly because each new year it had to be done again. Not so with Jesus' entry. It was once.

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.

If Jesus had to present Himself often as the sacrifice, He would also have to suffer often to be that sacrifice. But He did not have to because it was one sacrifice, one entry, and one presentation before the Father.

Now you have claimed that 9:25 is referring to various other offerings. But you have not addressed the evidence that kata used distributively means yearly.

And you have not spelled out what these other entries with blood by the high priest would be.

As noted,
-the inauguration is not yearly.
-The sin offering for the priest went into the first compartment, but that is as needed, not yearly, and Jesus is our high priest in the new and does not sin
-The sin offering for a single unintentional act of sin by the whole camp went into the first compartment. But this was not yearly, and might not have happened at all in a given year. Moreover, it is unclear how it would apply in the new covenant to all believers throughout time who would not be committing a single unknown sin together.

The other sin offerings did not go into the sanctuary.

The yearly, high priest entry with blood is the Day of Atonement. And verse 24-25 presents this presentation of Jesus as happening when Jesus entered into God's presence, not repeatedly, but once, as contrasted with the yearly entry with blood by the high priest which had to be repeated every year, year after year.

 

[tall73]

7:26-27 and 10:10 verses above do not appear to agree with your preference. So ... we differ on that point.

If you want to claim that "offer" must only refer to death, then you must explain 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.


It is not the death but the blood presentation that is described by "offer".

 

[BobRyan]

If you want to claim that "offer" must only refer to death, then you must explain 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.

Hebrews 9
7 but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance.

In 9:7 it is ambiguous as to whether the offering was on the alter or is later

It could have been in explicit form – as in


-- 7 but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, taking blood, which he THEN offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance.
Or -- 7 but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, taking blood, which he had just offered for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance.

But in my examples it is explicit.

• Heb 7:26-27 - High priest - daily - offers up sacrifices - on the altar
  
• Heb 9:28 "bear the sins of many" - on the cross
  
• Heb 10:10 - offering of the body of Christ - on the cross
  
• Heb 9:25-26, "offer often" = "suffer often" - on the cross
  
• Lev 1:9 - offer up in smoke
  
• Ex 29:13 - offer up in smoke
  
• Ex 29:25 - offer up in smoke

“offered” on the altar.

Heb 9

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.
26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.
27 And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,
28 so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.

Heb 7:27 (Christ) does not need DAILY LIKE the High Priest to OFFER UP sacrifices)

26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens;

27 who has no daily need, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because He did this once for all time when He offered up Himself.

Heb 10
10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;
12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,

Lev 1:9 Its entrails, however, and its legs he shall wash with water. And the priest shall offer all of it up in smoke on the altar as a burnt offering, an offering by fire as a soothing aroma to the Lord.


Ex 29:13 And you shall take all the fat that covers the entrails, and the lobe of the liver, and the two kidneys and the fat that is on them, and offer them up in smoke on the altar.

Ex 29:25 Then you shall take them from their hands, and offer them up in smoke on the altar on the burnt offering for a soothing aroma before the Lord; it is an offering by fire to the Lord.

 

[tall73]

In 9:7 it is ambiguous as to whether the offering was on the alter or is later

But in my examples it is explicit.

• Heb 7:26-27
• Heb 9:28
• Heb 10:10
• Heb 9:25-26, 9:27

Ambiguous?

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.

He goes....he takes blood....which he offers....the blood is what is offered after he goes. How is that ambiguous in the least?

And no, verse 24-25 is far from ambiguous, it too is in the context of entry, and it says He appears in God's presence on our behalf.

Now you didn't ever respond to the earlier back and forth on the completed blood work.

Do you agree that someone confesses in their time, and Jesus forgives them on the basis of the completed blood work in the first century?

And do you agree that someone is included in the new covenant based on the previous blood work and their current trust in Christ?

Hebrews 9
7 but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance.

In 9:7 it is ambiguous as to whether the offering was on the alter or is later

It could have been in explicit form – as in


-- 7 but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, taking blood, which he THEN offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance.
Or -- 7 but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, taking blood, which he had just offered for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance.

But in my examples it is explicit.

• Heb 7:26-27 - High priest - daily - offers up sacrifices - on the altar
  
• Heb 9:28 "bear the sins of many" - on the cross
  
• Heb 10:10 - offering of the body of Christ - on the cross
  
• Heb 9:25-26, "offer often" = "suffer often" - on the cross
  
• Lev 1:9 - offer up in smoke
  
• Ex 29:13 - offer up in smoke
  
• Ex 29:25 - offer up in smoke

“offered” on the altar.

Heb 9

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.
26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.
27 And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,
28 so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.

Heb 7:27 (Christ) does not need DAILY LIKE the High Priest to OFFER UP sacrifices)

26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens;

27 who has no daily need, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because He did this once for all time when He offered up Himself.

Heb 10
10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;
12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,

Lev 1:9 Its entrails, however, and its legs he shall wash with water. And the priest shall offer all of it up in smoke on the altar as a burnt offering, an offering by fire as a soothing aroma to the Lord.


Ex 29:13 And you shall take all the fat that covers the entrails, and the lobe of the liver, and the two kidneys and the fat that is on them, and offer them up in smoke on the altar.

Ex 29:25 Then you shall take them from their hands, and offer them up in smoke on the altar on the burnt offering for a soothing aroma before the Lord; it is an offering by fire to the Lord.

You are contending for "offer" to be used as a technical term. However, it is not in Scripture, or in Hebrews.

It means to present or bear, or offer, etc. Here are just a few of the uses:

Mat 2:11 And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh.

Mat 19:13 Then children were brought to him that he might lay his hands on them and pray. The disciples rebuked the people,

Luk 23:36 The soldiers also mocked him, coming up and offering him sour wine

Act 8:18 Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles' hands, he offered them money,

These are certainly not referring to the death of a sacrifice as a technical term.

The author of Hebrews has other uses clearly not indicating death:

Heb 12:7 It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating/presenting you as sons. For what son is there whom his father does not discipline?

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 "offering" in this case is the presentation of the blood. It is compared to the entrance of the priest with blood, not the death.

Verse 25 continues the thought of verse 24 where Jesus enters (past tense) to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. This is the presentation of the completed sacrifice in the sanctuary, not just the death outside of the sanctuary.

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,

This entry was once for all. We saw that earlier in the chapter, all the entries were fulfilled in one:

Heb 9:11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation)
Heb 9:12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.

The result of the entry was eternal redemption. It was necessary to take the blood in, not just kill the animal.

This is anticipated by 9:7. Now you claim it is not clear that it is referring to the blood being brought in. But it is, because the context is the entry, which is not referring to the death.

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.

The blood at entry is presented before God. This is in line with the uses of the word in Scripture and in Hebrews.

This was noted by Adventist scholar Felix Cortez in a footnote on page 25 of his dissertation The Anchor of the Soul that Enters 'Within the Veil': The Ascension of the 'Son' in the Letter to the Hebrews:

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).


And the meaning in 9:25 is that Jesus did not have to repeatedly enter into God's presence as the high priest entered yearly with blood. The service was once per year, but had to be repeated every year. Jesus only did it once.

And this entry to present/offer Himself before God was completed once for all as there is only one entry, as we saw in 9:12. Once Jesus entered and presented Himself, that is it. That is the blood ministration. He doesn't bring back bottles of blood. He is alive and presents His sacrifice before the Father. That is the end of the blood ministration. That is why it says He made purification for sin and then sat down.

Heb 1:3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high

Unlike the earthly high priest who had to leave from God's presence Jesus stays. He reigns as High Priest and King.

He now ministers on the basis of the completed blood work. We come to Him in real time to confess and receive the benefits of that already finished death, entry and presentation before God on our behalf.

That presentation of blood is what is pictured in Leviticus. It does not show review of books, but cleansing blood presented for the sins of all true believers.

Now the argument then goes on to state that if Jesus had to enter in with blood often He would also have to suffer (death) often. But this is not the case.

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.

His death, entry and presentation are once for all.

Here are a number of commentaries which look at the Greek and which discuss this presentation of Jesus in God's presence:

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.


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 παθειν 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.


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 προσφερειν εαυτον 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, εν...αιματι αλλοτριω, 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 (πολλακις προσφερειν εαυτον) would have been impossible without an oft-repeated suffering of death (πολλακισ παθειν).


The Greek Testament, on vs. 26, in reference to 25 and 26 and the argument therein:

This παθειν is here not equivalent to that προσφερειν, but is emphatically placed as a new necessity, involved in that; the πολλακις being common to both: the πολλακιςπροσφερειν necessitated the πολλακιςπαθειν. 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.

Jesus' offered Himself in God's presence, on our behalf, the completed sacrifice.