Does the Thief on the Cross bypass the Invesigative Judgement..

[Stryder06]

I am still waiting on a text that even includes the elements of the IJ.

There is no single text that states it. The doctrine is derived from the pattern shown forth on earth. Everything that happened on earth was only a glimpse of what is actually happening in heaven. On the Day of Atonement, the sins of the people were cleansed from the sanctuary and forever removed from the camp. The high priest took the blood of atonement within the veil and in essence pleaded that blood before the mercy seat. The priest then left the temple, with the accumulated sins of the people and placed them upon the scapegoat.

The teaching that Chris is now in the Most Holy Place pleading His blood before the Mercy Seat of the Father ties in directly with that. The "judging" that is taking place is not about God figuring out who is and isn't saved. God is simply separating "by the books" so to speak, His actual people, from those who simply profess to be His.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

In the camp of Israel they were all professed believers or they were cut off.

However, I keep hearing justification for the ij that the angels needed evidence. And if that was the case you would expect they want evidence for all people.

However, by all means show where you find the IJ to be the fulfillment of the Day of Atonement.

I am still waiting on a text that even includes the elements of the IJ.

If you follow the day of atonement service, the sins of the people that had been transfered to the sanctuary are then transfered to the scapegoat. This is what Jesus is doing in the IJ, cleansing the sanctuary from their confessed sins and determining them upon the scapegoat, Satan, to be lead into the wilderness (1000 years of solitude) to die (on the day of reckoning).

If you believe that the earthly sanctuary services were a type of the Heavenly, then what is your antitypical explanation of the day of atonement?

 

[JohnMarsten]

If you follow the day of atonement service, the sins of the people that had been transfered to the sanctuary are then transfered to the scapegoat. This is what Jesus is doing in the IJ, cleansing the sanctuary from their confessed sins and determining them upon the scapegoat, Satan, to be lead into the wilderness (1000 years of solitude) to die (on the day of reckoning).

If you believe that the earthly sanctuary services were a type of the Heavenly, then what is your antitypical explanation of the day of atonement?

and I always thought nothing impure can enter it, but maybe thats a different context

 

[Stryder06]

and I always thought nothing impure can enter it, but maybe thats a different context

If we consider the earthly service to be a pattern of the heavenly, then we can see that there must be some kind of affect that our sins have on the temple in heaven. What that is I don't know. I don't know if there's a physical manifestation of sin, or if it's simply the record of sin, that in and of itself defiles the sanctuary. I'm prone to think it may be the latter.

 

[tall73]

The day of atonement presents a phase in the history of salvation. It's a period in which the whole fate of humanity is decided. The judgment of the Little Horn is just a part of it. Yeah, the activities didn't end in 1844. But restoration has taken place since 1844, the Millerites remnant began preaching of Jesus' ministry in the heavenly sanctuary since 1844. And in contrast the activities(substitutes, sacraments and traditions) of the Little Horn haven been brought into greater light and many have come out of the harlot and her harlot daughters.

The Millerites were giving a false message about Jesus coming and the sanctuary being the earth. That didn't "fix" the problems of the Catholic church at all.

This is the judgment of the Little Horn. It won't be destroyed until the completion of the judgment and the time when everyone decides for himself or herself who to follow: to honour God and His law or Satan, his agent the Little Horn power and their traditions.

We agree that the termination of the 2300 days should result in the cessation of the activities of the little horn. But it does not in your version. It just means you haven't got the right application of the dates yet. But don't worry, it doesn't look like anyone else has yet either, which is often the case with unfulfilled prophecy.

The door is still shut to the outer court for those who have not enter into the Holy Place and then the Most Holy place by the merit of Christ.

Why would there be forgiveness for those have not accepted his forgiveness and willingly let him sanctify and prepare them for the judgment?

I think you missed the point of referencing the shut door. They did not understand the IJ yet, so it could not be restoring truth, just another trial and error false message that later morphed.

Our own scholars? Under whose education most of the pastoral students don't understand and believe our own message?

I must say these scholars have done well scholarly.

If they didn't believe it they wouldn't have held Glacierview in the first place and condemn Ford's views.

 

[tall73]

It says cleansing of the sanctuary. I know you are trying hard to get around this text. But it is still the one and only cleanse of the sanctuary that takes place typically on the Day of Atonement. .

Now this is outright untrue.

I am not working hard to get around it. I point blank showed you another instance that was not the Day of Atonement which is a closer parallel, and showed where they still commemorated a second instance as well.

The restoration was from the activities of the little horn. It says nothing at all about confessed sins of believers.

 

[tall73]

There is no single text that states it.

I agree. But then trying to cobble together a lot that state it isn't working either because the necessary elements are not there.

 

[tall73]

The doctrine is derived from the pattern shown forth on earth. Everything that happened on earth was only a glimpse of what is actually happening in heaven. On the Day of Atonement, the sins of the people were cleansed from the sanctuary and forever removed from the camp. The high priest took the blood of atonement within the veil and in essence pleaded that blood before the mercy seat. The priest then left the temple, with the accumulated sins of the people and placed them upon the scapegoat.

The teaching that Chris is now in the Most Holy Place pleading His blood before the Mercy Seat of the Father ties in directly with that. The "judging" that is taking place is not about God figuring out who is and isn't saved. God is simply separating "by the books" so to speak, His actual people, from those who simply profess to be His.



The doctrine is derived from the pattern shown forth on earth. Everything that happened on earth was only a glimpse of what is actually happening in heaven. On the Day of Atonement, the sins of the people were cleansed from the sanctuary and forever removed from the camp. The high priest took the blood of atonement within the veil and in essence pleaded that blood before the mercy seat. The priest then left the temple, with the accumulated sins of the people and placed them upon the scapegoat.

The teaching that Chris is now in the Most Holy Place pleading His blood before the Mercy Seat of the Father ties in directly with that. The "judging" that is taking place is not about God figuring out who is and isn't saved. God is simply separating "by the books" so to speak, His actual people, from those who simply profess to be His.

A. The cleansing INSIDE the sanctuary did not involve books or investigation. The blood was not examined. It was applied for forgiveness for the camp. The cleansing that happened in the sanctuary was an application of blood for atonement.


B. There is a simple explanation of its fulfillment in Day of Atonement language in Hebrews:


Heb 9:22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
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



Here we have the elements of the cleansing presentation of blood.


The context of purifying the sanctuary from SINS, not defilement from an outside force
Entry into God's presence
Once for all rather than the once per year High Priestly ministry with blood.

Here we have all the elements. Here we have a straightforward fulfillment of the type.

Death, entry, purificiation of the heavenly things.

But it was not in 1844.


Now the scapegoat part, that happened after He left the temple, I would think that still remains. But the cleansing application of blood was already presented.

Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,
Heb 10:13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet.
Heb 10:14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.


Jesus sat down after having ministered His one sacrifice in God's presence.



Now contrast that with the Adventist view of books. There was no investigation of the blood in the Day of Atonement. There was cleansing by blood. And it already happened.

Now we either avail ourselves of it or not.

 

[tall73]

and I always thought nothing impure can enter it, but maybe thats a different context

Both the earthly and heavenly were defiled by our sin and needed cleansing.

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.

 

[Stryder06]

A. The cleansing INSIDE the sanctuary did not involve books or investigation. The blood was not examined. It was applied for forgiveness for the camp. The cleansing that happened in the sanctuary was an application of blood for atonement.

Indeed. And when Christ went into the MHP He presented Himself before the Father, thus His blood was applied to the sanctuary to cleanse it. Again, what happened on earth was not an exact recreation of what was happening in heaven.

B. There is a simple explanation of its fulfillment in Day of Atonement language in Hebrews:


Heb 9:22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
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



Here we have the elements of the cleansing presentation of blood.


The context of purifying the sanctuary from SINS, not defilement from an outside force
Entry into God's presence
Once for all rather than the once per year High Priestly ministry with blood.

Here we have all the elements. Here we have a straightforward fulfillment of the type.

Death, entry, purificiation of the heavenly things.

Indeed. We believe He entered into the Holy Place at His ascension to minster there first, just like the earthly priest did on the day of atonement.

But it was not in 1844.

His entrance into the MHP was.

Now the scapegoat part, that happened after He left the temple, I would think that still remains. But the cleansing application of blood was already presented.

Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,
Heb 10:13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet.
Heb 10:14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.


Jesus sat down after having ministered His one sacrifice in God's presence.

Sitting down at the right hand of Power is an expression to indicate a position of authority. It was not literal. Christ is our High Priest and Mediator. He is most certainly not "sitting down". When Christ leaves the sanctuary, He'll be on His way back to earth.

Now contrast that with the Adventist view of books. There was no investigation of the blood in the Day of Atonement. There was cleansing by blood. And it already happened.

Now we either avail ourselves of it or not.

You are making the mistake in thinking that the earthly service was a play by play of the heavenly one. It wasn't. Christ entered into the sanctuary, to minister in the holy place for a time. At the appointed time, just like with everything else, Christ moved into the Most Holy. And at the appointed time, He will leave and come to earth.

 

[tall73]

Indeed. And when Christ went into the MHP He presented Himself before the Father, thus His blood was applied to the sanctuary to cleanse it. Again, what happened on earth was not an exact recreation of what was happening in heaven.

Indeed. We believe He entered into the Holy Place at His ascension to minster there first, just like the earthly priest did on the day of atonement.

His entrance into the MHP was.

Stryder, the once per year entry of the high priest on the DOA WAS into the Most Holy place. So if Hebrews shows Jesus fulfilling that entry and cleansing the sanctuary that is the DOA, and that is the heavenly equivalent of the DOA.

God's presence was throughout the sanctuary and the camp, but the immediate presence was over the mercy seat-again MHP.

Moreover it says He entered "once for all by means of blood", and references goat blood in the type that He fulfilled.

There were only two entrances that involve entry into the sanctuary with goat blood and both went into the MHP.

Even to inaugurate which most Adventists admit He did He would have to go into the MHP long before 1844.

 

[tall73]

Sitting down at the right hand of Power is an expression to indicate a position of authority. It was not literal. Christ is our High Priest and Mediator. He is most certainly not "sitting down". When Christ leaves the sanctuary, He'll be on His way back to earth.

Sitting down at the right hand is a sign of authority. But in the context of that passage it is more.

Heb 10:11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,
Heb 10:13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet.
Heb 10:14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.

The sitting down of Jesus is contrasted with the continual standing of the priest to offer sacrifices.

Jesus did it once then sat down. He didn't have to stand and minister new blood all the time. He did it once and now we either accept it or not.


The continual ineffectual offering of the priest is contrasted with the one offering of Jesus.

The priest had to stand and never sat down because he always had more sacrifices to make--they didn't really cleanse.

But Jesus made one and did not need to continue.

 

[JohnMarsten]

Here is a explanation that I can across that is really good.....

'"Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven." Matthew 10:32

The thief on the cross did this.

"And straightway he preached Christ...that he is the Son of God." Acts 9:20 (speaking of Paul, right after he had his sight restored)

The thief on the cross did this.

"But we believe that through the grace of the LORD Jesus Christ we shall be saved" Acts 15:11

The thief on the cross did this (believed in Jesus).

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God" Ephesians 2:8

The thief did this (he acted on his faith & accepted the gift).

The IJ will show that the thief on the cross had fruit. '

yes, he had fruit...

what is most important here is that he endured to the end

I guess our final stage is the important factor,where will we be at the time of our death, are we gonna be with Jesus or not...

 

[Stryder06]

Stryder, the once per year entry of the high priest on the DOA WAS into the Most Holy place. So if Hebrews shows Jesus fulfilling that entry and cleansing the sanctuary that is the DOA, and that is the heavenly equivalent of the DOA.

God's presence was throughout the sanctuary and the camp, but the immediate presence was over the mercy seat-again MHP.

Moreover it says He entered "once for all by means of blood", and references goat blood in the type that He fulfilled.

There were only two entrances that involve entry into the sanctuary with goat blood and both went into the MHP.

Even to inaugurate which most Adventists admit He did He would have to go into the MHP long before 1844.

Hebrews speaks of Christ entering into the Sanctuary. The Holy Place, and Most Holy placed were both cleansed on the DOA. The placement of Christ within the sanctuary is not determined by Hebrews nor is He trying to determine that so much as he is trying to show that Christ is our new High Priest.

 

[Stryder06]

Sitting down at the right hand is a sign of authority. But in the context of that passage it is more.

Heb 10:11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,
Heb 10:13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet.
Heb 10:14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.

The sitting down of Jesus is contrasted with the continual standing of the priest to offer sacrifices.

Jesus did it once then sat down. He didn't have to stand and minister new blood all the time. He did it once and now we either accept it or not.


The continual ineffectual offering of the priest is contrasted with the one offering of Jesus.

The priest had to stand and never sat down because he always had more sacrifices to make--they didn't really cleanse.

But Jesus made one and did not need to continue.

I see the contrast as in Christ's work being all sufficient while the earthly priest's work was not. Again, the author of Hebrews is making a case as to why Christ is a Superior High Priest. Christ wasn't sitting on the right hand of the Father literally. In Revelation, John see's Christ walking about the 7 candlesticks. The menorah on earth was in the holy place, and since it was fashioned after the pattern of the one in heaven, you can rightly deduce that Christ was in the Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary, when He showed Himself to John.

 

[tall73]

Hebrews speaks of Christ entering into the Sanctuary. The Holy Place, and Most Holy placed were both cleansed on the DOA. The placement of Christ within the sanctuary is not determined by Hebrews nor is He trying to determine that so much as he is trying to show that Christ is our new High Priest.

Stryder he describes the need for the cleansing then describes Jesus entry to fulfill it, entry into God's presence, contrasted with the type of the entry of the high priest once per year

It is saying where He went.

 

[tall73]

I see the contrast as in Christ's work being all sufficient while the earthly priest's work was not. Again, the author of Hebrews is making a case as to why Christ is a Superior High Priest. Christ wasn't sitting on the right hand of the Father literally.

It says the sacrifice was all sufficient and offered. Then He sat down, contrasted with the priests who had to keep ministering blood. It is symbolic. But it certainly says more than you want to acknowledge.

In Revelation, John see's Christ walking about the 7 candlesticks. The menorah on earth was in the holy place, and since it was fashioned after the pattern of the one in heaven, you can rightly deduce that Christ was in the Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary, when He showed Himself to John.

You might want to read that more carefully. Revelation interprets the candlesticks in that passage as the churches in Asia. So are you arguing that the holy place is in the province of Asia?

Rev 1:20 As for the mystery of the seven stars that you saw in my right hand, and the seven golden lampstands, the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

You might want to read that more carefully. Revelation interprets the candlesticks in that passage as the churches in Asia. So are you arguing that the holy place is in the province of Asia?

Rev 1:20 As for the mystery of the seven stars that you saw in my right hand, and the seven golden lampstands, the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.

It's metaphorical of what the mennorah symbolizes in the sanctuary message... we are to be the light of the world. But again you know this so again I call foul on your lame attempt to confuse the issue.

You and Pythons seem to have a similar MO... and you seem to agree on a lot of docrinal issues. Congratulation my former brother, you have slid into apostacy with Catholic doctrine.

Those who are departing from the faith are at work to undermine the confidence of others, and they have been thus at work for years. Our warnings come from the One who is interested in us, because he sees our dangers, and is acquainted with the conniving of those who are opposed to His truth. . . . {7MR 192.3}

Ministers and doctors may depart from the faith, as the Word declares they will, and as the messages that God has given His servant declare they will. Thus believers will be given evidence that the Word of God, the warnings He has given, are being fulfilled right among us. Some may make

-193-
light of these messages, misinterpret them, and say untruthful things, which lead others' minds astray. Our only hope is in the God of truth. Our Mediator understands every phase of the matter. The more plainly the testing truth is brought before the people, the more bitter will be the hatred manifested by those who have departed from the faith, and given their attention to sentiments of Satan's presentation.--Letter 90, 1906, pp. 1, 2, 6.

 

[Stryder06]

It says the sacrifice was all sufficient and offered. Then He sat down, contrasted with the priests who had to keep ministering blood. It is symbolic. But it certainly says more than you want to acknowledge.

No. What I'm not acknowledging is what you say it's saying. Again, He wouldn't be our Priest nor our Advocate were He simply "sitting down".

You might want to read that more carefully. Revelation interprets the candlesticks in that passage as the churches in Asia. So are you arguing that the holy place is in the province of Asia?

Rev 1:20 As for the mystery of the seven stars that you saw in my right hand, and the seven golden lampstands, the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.

I've read it quite carefully. The candlesticks were representative of those churches, but are also representative of the 7 era's the church went through. But of course, I see the symbolism in Revelation that correlates with the earthly sanctuary, from the lampstands, to the altar of incense, to the ark of the covenant, and so on. Christ is most assuredly depicted as working inside of the holy place of the heavenly sanctuary.

 

[OntheDL]

The Millerites were giving a false message about Jesus coming and the sanctuary being the earth. That didn't "fix" the problems of the Catholic church at all.

The Millerites gave the present truth message. Prior to their movement, the Christianity as a whole did not believe Christ's return was imminent. That was a real argument more so than the actual date. Now the mainstream Christians owe their thanks to the 'Adventists'.

We agree that the termination of the 2300 days should result in the cessation of the activities of the little horn. But it does not in your version. It just means you haven't got the right application of the dates yet. But don't worry, it doesn't look like anyone else has yet either, which is often the case with unfulfilled prophecy.

The type is a day. The antitype is a period in the history of salvation. So at the end of the antitypical day, the completion of the judgment, the little horn power will be destroyed.

I think you missed the point of referencing the shut door. They did not understand the IJ yet, so it could not be restoring truth, just another trial and error false message that later morphed.

Their (the Millerites) message was the message of sanctification in preparation for judgment. If their message was true, then those who rejected the sanctification message were shut out. How is that a trial and error message.

The ONLY part that needed correction was where the sanctuary was: the earth or the heavenly sanctuary.

If they didn't believe it they wouldn't have held Glacierview in the first place and condemn Ford's views.

My question is then that if they truly believed the message then why did they even need a review committee to study and 'reaffirm' church's belief on the sanctuary. Do you think the pioneers would have needed a refresher course?