any easy way to destroy the IJ

[Adventist Dissident]

I have been talking to an associate of mine and he mentioned a simple way to destroy the IJ.
SDAiam, teaches that there is a sancturary in heaven and that there are 2 apartments the HOLY PLACE and the MOST HOLY PLACE, the tabernacle and the temple are based on this. Upon Jesus returning into heaven he went in to the Holy place and began HP ministery. Then in 1844 at the end of the 2300 day prophecy of Daniel 8, according to their calculation, Jesus entered The Most HOLY PLACE and began reviewing the records of all who have ever professed christianity and at the end of his review he will come back and give his reward to the faithful. Another name for this is the Pre Advent Judgement. God decides before he comes back.
Well this is just not true. and the easy way to show this is to ask the question
"Where did Jesus Go when he went to Heaven?"
The bible says the right hand of god, the right hand of the throne of God , the right hand of Majesty. Rev 5 says he is seated on the throne.
Well which thone is it and where is it. in the sanctuary symbolism there is only One throne, and that Is in the MHP. The ark of the covenat is the symbol of the Throne of God

 

[AzA]

An interesting game. On further investigation you might find that the church has adjusted its description of "the IJ" such that your summary no longer fits it. There's tremendous variation within Adventism among those who accept some form of pre-advent judgment re. what the symbols, what the meanings are, whether there are literal objects in the other dimension, what the purpose of said phase is, who benefits, who it's in favor of, who's on display, who's on trial, who's affected, and what the outcome and on-the-ground significance of all that is.
The favored articulation of "The IJ" changes every few years or so, and thus the real fun arises because some don't realize it changes and believe their articulation is the original, the best, or the only.

Unless the pigeons are stooling on you, perhaps you can see your way clear to leaving them be.

 

[tall73]

We have been discussing that very point in the thread in the traditional section. Jon and DL have stated in the past that they believe the throne to be the table of shewbread.

While most Adventists now realize that at the very least Jesus entered the MHP in order to inaugurate (because that is what the type would call for at inauguration) and no longer focus quite so much on the geography, your point still holds true. If Jesus went into God's presence and finished and sat down at God's right hand He clearly was fulfilling the sacrificial aspects of the day of atonement, presenting the sacrifice.

We can come boldly to the THRONE of grace now whereas the old earthly high priest, among all the people, could only go in once per year before.


I have elaborated more fully in the CARM version of your thread.

 

[Restin]

The Investigative Judgment in the call to the wedding supper in Matthew 23.

Matt 22:4 .... Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed,
and all things are ready: come unto the marriage.KJV

Note the supper is 'prepared' --- ready when Jesus assends to heaven after being here on this earth.

Also note how many times AFTER the wedding supper is already 'prepared' the call is given.....again

1844 is one of those times.

I believe the call will come, is coming again-- now and future!

Restin

 

[Adventist Dissident]

The Investigative Judgment in the call to the wedding supper in Matthew 23.


Note the supper is 'prepared' --- ready when Jesus assends to heaven after being here on this earth.

Also note how many times AFTER the wedding supper is already 'prepared' the call is given.....again

1844 is one of those times.

I believe the call will come, is coming again-- now and future!

Restin

there is nothing in that text that says anything about the IJ,

 

[Adventist Dissident]

An interesting game. On further investigation you might find that the church has adjusted its description of "the IJ" such that your summary no longer fits it. There's tremendous variation within Adventism among those who accept some form of pre-advent judgment re. what the symbols, what the meanings are, whether there are literal objects in the other dimension, what the purpose of said phase is, who benefits, who it's in favor of, who's on display, who's on trial, who's affected, and what the outcome and on-the-ground significance of all that is.
The favored articulation of "The IJ" changes every few years or so, and thus the real fun arises because some don't realize it changes and believe their articulation is the original, the best, or the only.

Unless the pigeons are stooling on you, perhaps you can see your way clear to leaving them be.

NOt true, adventisms IJ rises and falls on 1844, and jesus entering the MPH. If Jesus was in the MHP before 1844 then the IJ is false.

Right hand of the Father, Right hand of the Thone of God, Right hand of Majestey. That is were jesus went in the 1st centery and is today.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

NOt true, adventisms IJ rises and falls on 1844, and jesus entering the MPH. If Jesus was in the MHP before 1844 then the IJ is false.

Right hand of the Father, Right hand of the Thone of God, Right hand of Majestey. That is were jesus went in the 1st centery and is today.

Actually I would guess more then half of modern Adventists don't hold to the IJ as you listed. That is the old version, if you noticed when the Lesson Study guide went over this subject a couple years ago it was much more in line with 1844 set in motion the beginning of the Three Angels Message through the establishment of the Adventist church. That the IJ is for the rest of the universe as they establish that God is in fact correct in who He saves.

It is only to those holding to the previous version of the IJ that your effort would have any effect. And as you can see in the Traditional Adventist thread it does not matter how much information you give them they won't believe because they are too heavily invested in EGW.

 

[tall73]

There are so many versions and revisions of the IJ by now that even in the DARCOM series they noted that the discerning reader would notice differences among the theologians that no effort was made to reconcile. They have three main theories of how to explain the DOA references even among those who actually admit them, which by now is the majority. As long as you deny the DOA ministration of blood didn't happen then they don't care how you explain it.

Most Adventists don't talk about it at all anymore so they don't notice the differences.

 

[tall73]

Hey, did anyone notice that Ford put up the first three chapters of his book online? Check it out!

http://www.goodnewsforadventists.com/home/skymultipage.php?id=361&keyid=364


Anyway this quote from his book illustrates the change in views and interest in the IJ:
Warning from M. L. Andreasen
The history of this movement shows that we have not always profited by heresies as we might. Ballenger headed a movement attacking the doctrine of the sanctuary. This occasioned a review of this question, but the study was mostly aimed at refuting charges leveled against us and did not involve the larger aspects and inspirations of our teaching. As soon as the immediate crisis was past, we did little or no further official study, though sharp differences and divergent views had been revealed that should have called for an exhaustive investigation of the subject.
When Conradi had his hearings, we were not much better off; and Fletcher was perplexed by the many different views he met among our men in Washington. True, we did some studying as we were faced with the necessity of meeting theissue; but again, as soon as the crisis was past, we felt our work done. To the best of my knowledge and belief, there has been no official or authorized study since then. We shall be unprepared when another crisis occurs.
I doubt that we fully appreciate how much these heresies have undermined the faith of the ministry in our doctrine of the sanctuary. If my experience as a teacher in the Seminary may be taken as a criterion, I would say that a large number of our ministers have serious doubt as to the correctness of the views we hold on certain phases of the sanctuary. They believe, in a general way, that we are correct, but they are as fully assured that Ballenger's views have never been fully met and that we cannot meet them. Not wishing to make the matter an issue, they simply decide that the question is not vital - and thus the whole subject of the sanctuary is relegated, in their minds at least, to the background. This is not a wholesome situation. If the subject is as vital as we have thought and taught it to be, it is notof secondary importance. Today, in the minds of a considerable part of the ministry, as far as my experience in the Seminary is concerned, it has little vital bearing, either in their lives or theology.
I dread to see the day when our enemies will make capital of our weakness. I dread still more to see the day when our ministry will begin to raise questions.

 

[AzA]

RC, tall -- cheers.

 

[Restin]

Restin - The Investigative Judgment in the call to the wedding supper in Matthew 23.

Note the supper is 'prepared' --- ready when Jesus assends to heaven after being here on this earth. Also note how many times AFTER the wedding supper is already 'prepared' the call is given.....again

1844 is one of those times.
I believe the call will come, is coming again-- now and future!

icedragon - there is nothing in that text that says anything about the IJ,

The wedding supper is more fully explained in the following text:

Matthew 22:12 And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having
a wedding garment? And he was speechless.

13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away,
and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. KJV

The two wedding stories told by Jesus relate different aspects of the same event - Investigative Judgment!

restin

 

[Your Neighbor]

Is this a MOVING THRONE?

[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. [/FONT]

 

[Adventist Dissident]

The wedding supper is more fully explained in the following text:
The two wedding stories told by Jesus relate different aspects of the same event - Investigative Judgment!

restin

Is this the best you have? you might as well give up right now.

Jesus went to the right hand of the throne of the Father in the first centurary and has been there ever since. Infact in is part of Nicean Creed. Something SDA's cannot affirm.