Preparation for Great Controversy issues, Chapter 28

[RC_NewProtestants]

I thought it was ok to ask questions here. Is that not true?

4.2 Non Seventh-day Adventists and other Seventh-day Adventists who do not identify themselves as Traditional Seventh-day Adventists may ask questions on issues relevant to Traditional Adventists.

 

[tall73]

Red the weekend is fine.

 

[mva1985]

I want to thank all who are taking the time to be involved in this.

Thanks guys!!!

 

[tall73]

DL the conversation started in the bee thread in the DD section.

 

[Jimlarmore]

this is the computer age we don't need you interliner
End:
World:
appeared:
The idea that he appeared not with Christ life and death and resurrection but at some future time makes no contextual sense. It is true that end can have different meanings based upon what the end of is provided by the context. As in the end of the day is different from the end of the year. So with the context I still don't see how you are using the word end, maybe since I have posted the definitions you can now explain what you mean?

I think the word end in this verse is "Sunteleia" which means conclusion or all together "finish." This goes together well with the rest of the verse which ends with " ho aiOn eis anthetEsis" which is translated " of the eons into unplacing the repudiation."

Like I said this is the same word for end that Christ used in Matt 24 when speaking of the end of the world and His second coming. It does not fit in well with just the end of the age of Christ but it clearly is indicating the end of the world itself which is exactly the time that the IJ is supposed to be happening.

Sorry, if I got you in trouble here. We can take this to
D/D if you want.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[reddogs]

Red the weekend is fine.

Excellent, I will talk to my guys on Sabbath...

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I think the word end in this verse is "Sunteleia" which means conclusion or all together "finish." This goes together well with the rest of the verse which ends with " ho aiOn eis anthetEsis" which is translated " of the eons into unplacing the repudiation."

Like I said this is the same word for end that Christ used in Matt 24 when speaking of the end of the world and His second coming. It does not fit in well with just the end of the age of Christ but it clearly is indicating the end of the world itself which is exactly the time that the IJ is supposed to be happening.

Sorry, if I got you in trouble here. We can take this to
D/D if you want.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

Well I don't think you made the case but then if you take it to mean the conclusion of everything then it certainly doesn't work with 1844 and the IJ any better does it? I like how the NASB version reads:

[SIZE=-0][SIZE=-0] Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the [SIZE=+1]consummation[/SIZE] of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.[/SIZE][/SIZE]

Or as I think the New English Bibles says the climax of the ages. But you still have to deal with the "now" part of the verse as well as the "appearing" part of the verse, I still don't see how you are making those parts fit with a future application, how can they be future?

 

[Jimlarmore]

The time of the end is clearly pointed out in the apocalypse ( Revelation ). We know that the longest prophetic time line ever given ended in 1843/44 so this is the time of the "consumation" or "end" I think it is referring to in Heb 9:26.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

So just to be clear here Jim, you think Ellen White was wrong when she attributed this verse to the past by referencing the sacrifice that open up the way?

Advent Review and Sabbath Herald .1900-06-12.016

How different was the true High Priest from the false and corrupted Caiaphas. Christ stood before the false high priest, pure and undefiled, without a taint of sin.

Christ mourned for the transgression of every human being. He bore even the guiltiness of Caiaphas, knowing the hypocrisy that dwelt in his soul, while for pretense he rent his robe. Christ did not rend his robe, but his soul was rent. His garment of human flesh was rent as he hung on the cross, the sin-bearer of the race. By his suffering and death a new and living way was opened. There is no longer a wall of partition between Jew and Gentile. "By one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified." This enabled him to proclaim on the cross, with a clear and triumphant voice, "It is finished." "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; nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with the blood of others; for then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself." "This man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God." Christ entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. "Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them." He has qualified himself to be not only man's representative, but his advocate, so that every soul, if he will, may say, I have a Friend at court, a High Priest who is touched with the feeling of my infirmities.

 

[Jimlarmore]

So just to be clear here Jim, you think Ellen White was wrong when she attributed this verse to the past by referencing the sacrifice that open up the way?

On the contrary I believe Christ started performing the atonement for all mankind at His ascension as the book of Hebrews says He did. This is one of the issues with the IJ that the church needs to deal with. The "cleansing" or setting right of the heavenly temple in the end times must be a part of His continual intercessionary work that started at His ascension and continues to the close of probation.

1844 marks the end of prophetic time and gives us a time to set for the end times. It is solid prophetically and I beleive that a special judgement may have started to occurr back then and is occurring as we speak intil the close of probation just before the second advent. This judgement is for all of the unfallen beings in the universe to take part in and is a part of the way God has always done things historically in the past.

Atonement and mediation has to be a hand in hand operation as Christ bridges the gap between man and the Father, so they both are an ongoing thing. To demand that the atonement in heaven took place in a one time ceremony in heaven as it did in the OT sanctuary may not be fully grasping the dynamics of this salvatorial work being done in heaven.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

On the contrary I believe Christ started performing the atonement for all mankind at His ascension as the book of Hebrews says He did. This is one of the issues with the IJ that the church needs to deal with. The "cleansing" or setting right of the heavenly temple in the end times must be a part of His continual intercessionary work that started at His ascension and continues to the close of probation.

You are making me more confused. You said in regard to "end" in Hebrews 9:26 that it is not referring to back in the time of Christ but to 1844 with the assumption that 1844 is somehow the end of the world. You said:

The time of the end is clearly pointed out in the apocalypse ( Revelation ). We know that the longest prophetic time line ever given ended in 1843/44 so this is the time of the "consumation" or "end" I think it is referring to in Heb 9:26.

So it would seem you either agree with EGW's time understanding or you don't. I don't see how you can agree with both and claim that it is a future application. That has been my question all along. I can't think of any commentary that would place Hebrews 9:26 in the future, but you said the language placed it in the future. Now you say that it is both the future as well as the past. Which would be more in line with my understanding which is likewise represented in most commentaries as well as Bible scholars, that the New Testament was viewed by it's writers as the time of the end.

So I still don't see the reason for you separating this into two time periods. The things of heaven are purified by the better sacrifice which was a once and for all sacrifice which has occurred. And now it seems you agree that the "end of the world" is applicable to the time of Christ so I don't see the need to create a separate time frame also. Even in Matthew 24 the end of the world encompassed the time from the destruction of Jerusalem to when ever the second coming will be which appears to be so far nearly 2000 years.

But I think you have explained about as much as you are able to so thank you. ( because frankly I can't think of a way to ask you any more questions when you say you agree with EGW's view that the verse is fulfilled in the past and still say it is future because the end of the world can only refer to the future.)

 

[Jimlarmore]

You are making me more confused. You said in regard to "end" in Hebrews 9:26 that it is not referring to back in the time of Christ but to 1844 with the assumption that 1844 is somehow the end of the world.


So it would seem you either agree with EGW's time understanding or you don't. I don't see how you can agree with both and claim that it is a future application. That has been my question all along. I can't think of any commentary that would place Hebrews 9:26 in the future, but you said the language placed it in the future. Now you say that it is both the future as well as the past. Which would be more in line with my understanding which is likewise represented in most commentaries as well as Bible scholars, that the New Testament was viewed by it's writers as the time of the end.

So I still don't see the reason for you separating this into two time periods. The things of heaven are purified by the better sacrifice which was a once and for all sacrifice which has occurred. And now it seems you agree that the "end of the world" is applicable to the time of Christ so I don't see the need to create a separate time frame also. Even in Matthew 24 the end of the world encompassed the time from the destruction of Jerusalem to when ever the second coming will be which appears to be so far nearly 2000 years.

But I think you have explained about as much as you are able to so thank you. ( because frankly I can't think of a way to ask you any more questions when you say you agree with EGW's view that the verse is fulfilled in the past and still say it is future because the end of the world can only refer to the future.)

The atonement of Christ at His ascension was made for all times not just a one time ceremony back then at His ascension. It covers all mankind forever. I think that the atonement and cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary is a co-synonymous act with the mediation work for mankind between Christ and the Father. The earthly priest's job was to present the blood of the Lord's goat inside the most holy where the skinah glory was present. This is what Christ is doing now in heaven as our mediator and will continue until the close of probation.

What needs to be fully researched and what I think may be is that what changed in 1844 is the atonement phase started to include the righteous dead from the times before His sacrifice on the cross and now it may be including the professed Christians of the living. I've thought about this a lot and it's the only thing I can come up with.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[tall73]

Alright Red, I now have my internet back up. So whenever they start responding I will start analyzing the response.

 

[tall73]

I will not debate here but if RC and Jim would like they can view my take on the "end" discussion. The discussion started in this thread, and I had made a reply to Jim's assertion regarding the term.

http://christianforums.com/t6402262-the-ij-and-the-presentation-of-blood.html&page=8&highlight=blood

 

[reddogs]

Alright Red, I now have my internet back up. So whenever they start responding I will start analyzing the response.

Tall, I was able to talk with them, with the holidays they've been a bit busy, but now should be able to focus more time studying your objections and begin the replies. Its a bit slower going than I anticipated, but hopefully they will be able to post all their replies within the next few days. Thanks for being so patient...

Red

 

[tall73]

Tall, I was able to talk with them, with the holidays they've been a bit busy, but now should be able to focus more time studying your objections and begin the replies. Its a bit slower going than I anticipated, but hopefully they will be able to post all their replies within the next few days. Thanks for being so patient...

Red

No problem.

 

[AMujeres]

Hello Tall73,

I’m sorry that I have not been able to respond to your discussion on the IJ. This is the busiest time of the year for me and I’m working 10-13 hours a day, plus family duties leave me with little time. I have not been a regular member of Christianforums.com before and I’m not familiar with how it works but I’m learning as we communicate with this discussion. I did not realize what I was getting myself into in relation to the proper time it would take with this discussion when I agreed to be involved with the discussion on the IJ.
I think you bring up important points of discussion on the IJ, as have been historical points of debate from the Protestant and Catholic world since shortly after 1844. I think it is most important as SDA’s we biblically understand and experience the Sanctuary message and of course this includes the IJ.
The Sanctuary experience is how we put on Christ and His Righteousness and continually yield our wills to His will and not to self-will. As we give up our self-will (sins) they are placed in the Sanctuary in Heaven and therefore the Sanctuary needs cleansing and Christ as High Priest cleanses our hearts and minds and the Sanctuary and finishes the Atonement work that He has started, for this is why He is High Priest.
I believe this is what the bible teaches and not just the ideas of Ellen White. Historically, Adventist where very deep bible students and they didn’t take one or two bible verses and make a doctrine out of it but used many bible text to prove a doctrine or teaching. I believe with your discussion and challenge we as SDA’s may learn more clearly the biblical doctrine of the IJ and the experience of the Sanctuary that Christ as High Priest wants to impart to us as we search His word.
I do not have time now or prepared to comment on your post at this time but with your patience and some free time on my end I will make comments a little at a time.

Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus. Heb. 3:1.
Having therefore, brethren boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus. By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; and having an high priest over the house of God; Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; for he is faithful that promised. Heb.10: 19-22.

God Bless the reading of His Word,
Jack

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I see this proposed debate was a big dud.
http://christianforums.com/t6650659


No surprising however.

 

[reddogs]

I see this proposed debate was a big dud.
http://christianforums.com/t6650659


No surprising however.

James and Jack have their own business so they are a bit busy, but when they get a break or holiday, we'll get to it....

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Why not have Doc post Goldsteins book on the IJ on the main SDA forum he seems to like doing that.