• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.
  7. There has been an addition to the announcement regarding unacceptable nick names. The phrase "Let's go Brandon" actually stands for a profanity and will be seen as a violation of the profanity rule in the future.

Seventh-day Adventists affirm "sola scriptura testing" AND The 1Cor 12 gift of prophecy

Discussion in 'Denomination Specific Theology' started by BobRyan, Nov 1, 2021.

  1. tall73

    tall73 Sophia7's husband Supporter

    +4,849
    Christian
    Married
    I mentioned that ultimately the main issue is who bears our sins, taking the penalty, Christ or Satan.

    To my mind there is no question that it is Christ, and this is reiterated throughout the Scriptures. But here are the details. Some of this is a repeat from my discussion with LGW:

    The scapegoat is not, that I am aware of, explained in any New Testament text. So we will have to look at the type and try to draw conclusions, but can't be overly dogmatic.

    However, there is enough information to be quite clear that the the scapegoat does not represent Satan. The scapegoat is showing another aspect of Jesus' work in removing sins.

    Both the Lord's goat and the goat for azazel are for a sin offering:

    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.


    The two goats were both ceremonially clean sacrificial animals. Satan is in no way capable of being a sin offering, nor is he ceremonially clean. He is not interchangeable with Christ in any respect. Jesus is God, and sinless, and Satan is a sinful created being.

    Rather, the clean animal always pointed to Jesus in the type. So the two goats appear to show aspects of Jesus' one atonement. So the reason for confessing the sins and placing the hands on the goat for azazel is that it is a part of the sin offering, and the atonement.

    Lev 16:7 Then he shall take the two goats and set them before the LORD at the entrance of the tent of meeting.
    Lev 16:8 And Aaron shall cast lots over the two goats, one lot for the LORD and the other lot for Azazel.
    Lev 16:9 And Aaron shall present the goat on which the lot fell for the LORD and use it as a sin offering,
    Lev 16:10 but the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the LORD to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Azazel.


    The above text tells us that the goat for azazel is used to make atonement. Satan can in no way make atonement for the sins of the people of God. He will experience the lake of fire for his own sins. His sin of rebellion and his temptation of others are all his sins to bear. The wicked still die for their own sins. And the righteous would bear their sin the same as the wicked except Christ died for them as a substitute. Jesus was sinless, and He bore our sin.

    But as a sinful creature Satan cannot bear sin for others. He cannot be a substitute. He can only bear his own sin.

    Moreover, the text says the goat is "for azazel." The meaning of this term is debated. Three main views have been proposed, based on different etymology.

    The first is the meaning of total removal.

    The second, which seems a bit more based on later tradition but is a possibility, is that it refers to rough ground or a mountain that it is cast down from. But this casting down or killing is not mentioned in the text. It is referred to in later practice.

    The third is that azazel is a demon in the wilderness. In this case Azazel would be a proper name, and as one goat is for the Lord and one for azazel. This view became more prominent after the book of Enoch which mentions a demon named azazel. But it is not stated in the text either. And the LXX translation has more the concept of removal.

    And if you interpret azazel as a demon, then the goat is not the demon, but is FOR azazel, or sent to him.

    But if it just means goat for removal, then the goat is pictured as carrying sins completely out of the camp.

    Since this happens after the high priest leaves the sanctuary that would place it at the second coming. As the high priest sent the sins from the camp, Jesus will remove everything from the earth and universe, from His kingdom, everything that defiles. And in this case that includes the effects of the sins of the people who now are trusting in Him. All things associated with sin will be removed, even the old heavens and earth, and a new heavens and earth will be the home of righteousness:

    2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed.
    2Pe 3:11 Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness,
    2Pe 3:12 waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set on fire and dissolved, and the heavenly bodies will melt as they burn!

    2Pe 3:13 But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.

    This same reality is seen in other figures in Revelation, where no mark or trace of sin is left in the dwelling place of God and His people:


    Rev 21:1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more.
    Rev 21:2 And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
    Rev 21:3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God.
    Rev 21:4 He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”
    Rev 21:5 And he who was seated on the throne said, “Behold, I am making all things new.” Also he said, “Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.”

    Rev 21:27 But nothing unclean will ever enter it, nor anyone who does what is detestable or false, but only those who are written in the Lamb's book of life.

    Rev 22:3 No longer will there be anything accursed, but the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and his servants will worship him.


    The sins are not only atoned for, but all trace of sin and rebellion is removed from His kingdom by Christ.

    Sinners go to the lake of fire for their sins
    Satan goes to the lake of fire for his sins

    And all trace of sin, even for God's people, is dissolved with that old world.


    And even someone sees the goat for azazel as going TO azazel, as in a demonic entity, then everything contaminated with sin would go to the same place that Satan is already at--the lake of fire.

    Either way, Satan doesn't make atonement at all for us. He can only bear his own sin. He is not sinless, and cannot be a sin offering, a substitute, or in anyway like Christ.


    So looking at the above, the sins are confessed over the goat for azazel because the two together are a sin offering and it represents some aspect of the atonement. Hence, the transfer happens for both animals, as both are involved.

    To summarize the Adventist system, they essentially reduce the work of Christ to transferring sin around:

    Sinner => sacrifice => priest =>sanctuary => high priest => scapegoat (Satan)

    But Jesus does more than that. He takes on the sin of the sinner and dies for it and His blood makes atonement. He is also the one to completely remove sin, sinners, and all the effects of sin from the universe. Jesus paid for our sins.

    Eph 1:7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace,
    Eph 1:8 which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2021
  2. tall73

    tall73 Sophia7's husband Supporter

    +4,849
    Christian
    Married
    We agree that the offerings were brought to the sanctuary, and the priesthood.

    But the result was blood atonement, not just shuffling sins around. Jesus died for our sins. Satan is not your sin-bearer.

    I notice you didn't explain how Satan can be a clean animal, identical to Jesus in the type.

    Or how Satan, a sinner, can make atonement for our sins. He must pay the price of his own sin. He cannot bear ours. And Jesus already did.

    You didn't show ANY text that said: "sin are transferred to the Sanctuary" by the sin offering. Unless you mean Ellen White's statement. And she is not Scripture. And this is a Scripture testing thread.

    Transferring sins around until you get to Satan is not atonement. Satan cannot atone for any of your sins.

    Jesus taking on our sins in His body and paying the price for us, and cleansing us with His holy blood is atonement.

    Agreed, atonement, and forgiveness.

    But not transfer of sin to the sanctuary. The wages of sin is death, and Jesus paid it. But you have the sin still there after His death, after the price was paid, and even claim His blood carries the sin.

    As the sins of the people were anciently transferred, in figure, to the earthly sanctuary by the blood of the sin-offering, so our sins are, in fact, transferred to the heavenly sanctuary by the blood of Christ. 4SP pg. 266

    And you have Satan as your sin bearer instead of Christ!

    It was seen, also, that while the sin offering pointed to Christ as a sacrifice, and the high priest represented Christ as a mediator, the scapegoat typified Satan, the author of sin, upon whom the sins of the truly penitent will finally be placed. Great Controversy


    Your theology is so turned around you have the precious blood of Christ transporting sin instead of cleansing it!

    How can Satan be represented by a clean sacrificial animal? How can that sinner possibly bear your sins?

    Jesus is your substitute, the perfect sinless Son of God who died for you. He bore your sins on the tree, and died for them to give you life.
     
  3. tall73

    tall73 Sophia7's husband Supporter

    +4,849
    Christian
    Married
    Now coming back to what we started to discuss earlier before looking at the sacrifices, Jesus already entered as High Priest, ONCE FOR ALL, by means of HIS OWN BLOOD, compared to the blood of bulls and goats in the type, and the result was securing eternal redemption.

    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.


    He already made purification in the heavenly:

    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.

    He already made purification for sins, in the first century, by His blood atonement:

    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

    You claim that making "purification for sins" or "cleansing for sins" was only about the death. But that is not the case. Because He entered by means of His blood as High Priest into God's presence on our behalf. The cleansing happened not just from the death but from the priestly ministration. And Jesus did that.

    And we also know that because the terminology is a reference to the purification with the blood of the sin offering, on the Day of Atonement from the type, in the sanctuary, upon the altar of incense, as you just referenced.

    In the LXX type it refers to the blood of καθαρισμοῦ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν " cleansing from sins", which is used to make atonement once per year.

    Exo 30:10 And Aaron shall make atonement on its horns once a year, with the blood of cleansing of sins of atonement, once in the year he shall cleanse it, throughout you generations: it is most holy to the Lord.

    Exo 30:10 καὶ ἐξιλάσεται ἐπ᾿ αὐτὸ Ααρων ἐπὶ τῶν κεράτων αὐτοῦ ἅπαξ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ· ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ καθαρισμοῦ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν τοῦ ἐξιλασμοῦ ἅπαξ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ καθαριεῖ αὐτὸ εἰς τὰς γενεὰς αὐτῶν· ἅγιον τῶν ἁγίων ἐστὶν κυρίῳ

    It uses the same terminology as found in 1:3.

    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 cleansing of sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high

    Heb 1:3 ὃς ὢν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ, φέρων τε τὰ πάντα τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ, δι᾿ ἑαυτοῦ καθαρισμὸν ποιησάμενος τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ τῆς μεγαλωσύνης ἐν ὑψηλοῖς,
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2021
  4. LoveGodsWord

    LoveGodsWord Well-Known Member

    +5,510
    Australia
    SDA
    Married
    Hello @Leaf473

    I will respond to the above posts written after my last post to you a little latter as I have some other real life work to attend to at the moment. I believe many of the claims and statements being made in the posts above this going back to my first post to you, are not accurate, or what I believe or have said and many of the claims made in these posts above are not biblical and simply repetition already addressed, seeking to disregard the ministrations of the work of the Great high Priest in the daily and yearly atonement for sin and their application under the new covenant that is reflected in the change of the Priesthoods from the old to the new covenants to the heavenly Sanctuary and Christs new role as our great high priest and superior sacrifice for all sin once and for all, but I will show why once more from the scriptures when I have some more time.

    God bless
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2021
  5. tall73

    tall73 Sophia7's husband Supporter

    +4,849
    Christian
    Married
    I am now going back to respond to some of your earlier points as I indicated that I would, after we looked in more depth at the sin offerings.

    No, the once for all sacrifice, and once for all entry into God's presence by means of blood, the purification for sins, already happened. That corresponds to what the high priest did in the sanctuary in the day of atonement type. This was accomplished in the first century.

    But the elements relating to the scapegoat, the cutting off of those who do not afflict themselves, etc. that happens after the high priest leaves the sanctuary, as in the type, and corresponds to the fall feast timing.

    Yes, I am not arguing yearly application. I am arguing that the parts that only happened once, once for all, in the first century, already happened. The rest happens when He leaves the sanctuary.

    We agree that He is High Priest, King, and Judge, and He is after the order of Melchizedek.

    The application of blood in the sanctuary was for cleansing, and it was already done.



    9:7 is describing the earthly type, which was purification with blood. Ellen White, and the Adventist fundamental belief are the ones who say that the IJ is the fulfillment of the type, not me. But that is incorrect. The type of the high priest activity on the Day of Atonement in the sanctuary was to present atoning blood.

    The ministration of blood fulfilled the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary, not deleted the ministry. The type showed cleansing blood application, and that is what happened. He made purification for sins.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2021
  6. Leaf473

    Leaf473 Well-Known Member

    +676
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    @tall73

    @LoveGodsWord

    My thanks to each of you for your explanations so far.
    And yes, anyone is welcome to explain more, if they wish.

    For me, the practical application or "where the rubber meets the road" is in the idea of sin in the end being all borne by Satan. If I were Satan, that's just the kind of thing I'd like to have said about me. It makes it sound like I have these really broad shoulders, capable of bearing the sin of the whole world.

    Which brings up the idea of prophecy, one of the subjects of this thread.

    Years ago I read some sections of The Great Controversy. My impression at the time was that it was not a message from God.

    These latest details about the final bearer of the sins of the world confirm that feeling.
     
  7. tall73

    tall73 Sophia7's husband Supporter

    +4,849
    Christian
    Married
    LoveGodsWord said:
    Actually no. Danial 8:14 deals with both the defilement of the little horn as well as the sins of Gods' people as the cleansing of the Sanctuary is the removal of all sin from the presence of God.

    tall73 said:

    Hezekiah cleansed the sanctuary from external defiling in 2 Chronicles 29, and it had nothing to do with the Day of Atonement.
    Daniel 8 shows defiling and casting down the sanctuary. Then it is restored.

    Dan 8:13 Then I heard a holy one speaking, and another holy one said to the one who spoke, “For how long is the vision concerning the regular burnt offering, the transgression that makes desolate, and the giving over of the sanctuary and host to be trampled underfoot?”
    Dan 8:14 And he said to me, “For 2,300 evenings and mornings. Then the sanctuary shall be restored to its rightful state.”

    Nothing is stated about the atonement for sins of the whole world in Daniel 8. And the purification for sins is stated to be in the past by the time Jesus sits down.



    It is your assertion that it is the Day of Atonement. But the whole context is about the activities of the Ram, the Goat, and the little horn, and the restoring/cleansing is from the activities of the little horn.

    And Hezekiah's cleansing is a closer parallel than the Day of Atonement, because it is a cleansing from defilement caused by activity against the sanctuary.

    Since you have not demonstrated that the context is about the Day of Atonement, and the cleansing is already seen as complete in the first century, per Hebrews, there is no reason to conclude this is what you claim. Restoring from external defilement is not the same as ritual cleansing of all sins.
     
  8. tall73

    tall73 Sophia7's husband Supporter

    +4,849
    Christian
    Married
    Thank you for reviewing it with us. And if you have any further observations about the type and antitype let us know. There is always more to learn, as it is a big topic!
     
  9. tall73

    tall73 Sophia7's husband Supporter

    +4,849
    Christian
    Married


    Ellen White references both those where blood was brought into the sanctuary, and those where it was not. Because two instances were brought into the sanctuary, including those for the earthly high priest, who was not a commoner, but was a man.

    And it says it made atonement in the holy place, just as it did in the yearly. It does not say sin was transferred to the sanctuary in any of the texts.

    And for the commoner there was also atonement for sin, made by the blood of the sin offering, not shuffling of sins to eventually land on Satan.

    Jesus is the sin bearer. He died for our sins. He paid the penalty.
     
  10. tall73

    tall73 Sophia7's husband Supporter

    +4,849
    Christian
    Married
    tall73 said:

    And transfer without the sin offering was demonstrated in multiple texts.

    Lev 15:28 But if she be cleansed of her issue, then she shall number to herself seven days, and after that she shall be clean.
    Lev 15:29 And on the eighth day she shall take unto her two turtles, or two young pigeons, and bring them unto the priest, to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.
    Lev 15:30 And the priest shall offer the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for her before the LORD for the issue of her uncleanness.
    Lev 15:31 Thus shall ye separate the children of Israel from their uncleanness; that they die not in their uncleanness, when they defile my tabernacle that is among them.


    Technically it is a discharge outside the time of her normal menstrual impurity:

    Lev 15:25 “If a woman has a discharge of blood for many days, not at the time of her menstrual impurity, or if she has a discharge beyond the time of her impurity, all the days of the discharge she shall continue in uncleanness. As in the days of her impurity, she shall be unclean.


    But she does have to offer a sin offering for her unclean discharge.

    Lev 15:30 And the priest shall use one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. And the priest shall make atonement for her before the LORD for her unclean discharge.

    And if she does not do so it defiles the tabernacle. It was not by the sin offering that the defiling happened, but if it was not offered, rejecting the provision.

    Lev 15:31 “Thus you shall keep the people of Israel separate from their uncleanness, lest they die in their uncleanness by defiling my tabernacle that is in their midst.”

    So we see the sin of refusing cleansing defiling the sanctuary, with no sin offering involved, because it was the sin offering that was rejected which resulted in the defiling of the tabernacle.
     
  11. tall73

    tall73 Sophia7's husband Supporter

    +4,849
    Christian
    Married
    tall73 said:

    Sin offerings were brought for uncleanness. And if they were not the person defiled the sanctuary.


    Physical impurities also needed sin offerings. And the yearly atonement, which pictures Jesus' once for all atonement with blood, dealt with both uncleanness and transgression:

    Lev 16:16 Thus he shall make atonement for the Holy Place, because of the uncleannesses of the people of Israel and because of their transgressions, all their sins. And so he shall do for the tent of meeting, which dwells with them in the midst of their uncleannesses.

    You wish to exclude them. But they were so serious that someone was cut off for not purifying when available. When it defiled the sanctuary if they didn't accept purification that is obviously serious. That is a sin, refusing the purification, that resulted in defiling, without any sin offering.

    No one stated ONLY uncleanness is represented. It is uncleanness and sin. Both required cleansing by blood. Blood cleanses, not transfers.

    They have a specific purpose, but they are still a sin offering for cleansing.

    Num 19:9 And a man who is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer and deposit them outside the camp in a clean place. And they shall be kept for the water for impurity for the congregation of the people of Israel; it is a sin offering.

    Notice that this person who didn't receive cleansing has now resulted in defiling the sanctuary, with no sin offering involved. This sin of not submitting to the purification process transfers sin to the sanctuary.

    We are discussing both. Because failure to be cleansed was a violation of the law punishable by being cut off. But that violation of the law caused defilement in the sanctuary, without a sin offering.

    It is very much on topic when violating what is commanded in the law is seen to defile the sanctuary without any sin offering being made.

    See also here:

    Lev 20:2 “Say to the people of Israel, Any one of the people of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech shall surely be put to death. The people of the land shall stone him with stones.
    Lev 20:3 I myself will set my face against that man and will cut him off from among his people, because he has given one of his children to Molech, to make my sanctuary unclean and to profane my holy name.

    The sin of sacrificing children to molech made the sanctuary unclean. But it was not by a sin offering. No sin offering was permitted for such activity, because it was a death penalty crime.
     
  12. ChetSinger

    ChetSinger Well-Known Member

    +552
    Protestant
    Married
    Thanks for this. It surprises me. And disturbs me. I didn't realize the Adventist view of the atonement is so different from the Orthodox one. I thought the only real differences were the insistence on sabbath observance and some idiosyncratic dietary views. Imo this is bigger.
     
  13. LoveGodsWord

    LoveGodsWord Well-Known Member

    +5,510
    Australia
    SDA
    Married
    @Leaf473 here is a response to the misinformation provided to you earlier.
    I believe you are misrepresenting what I have posted to you here despite me telling you exactly in earlier posts what I believe our main differences are. Firstly, no. As posted earlier to you I believe in context to the scriptures already shared with you that the cleansing of the Sanctuary and the yearly atonement as shown through the scriptures in Leviticus 16 that the sins of God's people that are brought into the Sanctuary for blood atonement is the reason why the Sanctuary needs cleansing. It is sin that causes uncleanness and defilement of the Sanctuary. According to the scriptures, it is because of the sins of Gods' people that have been brought into the presence of God in the Sanctuary that the sanctuary is cleansed on the great day of atonement (Leviticus 16).

    This ministration of the Priesthood is different to that of the daily ministration and atonement for sin. As shown through the scriptures already this includes the cleansing of all apartments of the Sanctuary from the most holy place, the holy place and the courtyard. This ministration also includes the final atonement for the collective sins of Gods' people through "the Lords goat" before the final work of removal of all sin from Gods' presence which according to the scriptures is transferred to the scapegoat which is then taken out by a strong man into the wilderness. As pointed out to you many times now I believe our main area of difference is in the understanding of the ministration of the High Priest and what his work is on the great day of atonement and the ministration of the Priesthood between the daily and yearly removal of sin from the presence of God. Your trying to disregard the yearly ministration of the Great high priests work in the cleansing of the Sanctuary on the great day of atonement. This is where the main area of difference is.
    Let's look at this in some detail. You agree with me that all sin offerings for God's people were to be made inside the Sanctuary as shown already though the scriptures in Leviticus 4:5-7; 18; Leviticus 4:27-35; Numbers 15; Leviticus 6:24-30. In the daily ministration of the Priesthood the sinner was to bring a sin offering to the Sanctuary and inside the Sanctuary you agree that the sinner transferred their sin by placing their hands on the sin offering in the presence of the Priest and the Lord transferring the sin from the sinner to the sin offering correct? From here the scriptures tell us that the sinner after transferring their sins to the sin offering had to kill the sin offering with their own hands (which is what we have done to Jesus) and at this time the Priest collected the blood of the sin offering to make atonement for the sinner by the sprinkling of blood on the alter of burnt offering and the remaining blood was poured out at the base of the alter. This in turn resulted in the atonement and cleansing of sin from the sinner and is also reflected in 1 John 1:9. Now note: Where was the sin transferred to inside the Sanctuary? The sinner transferred their sins to the sin offering. We are in agreement. Now where the sin offering pays the penalty of sin (death) in order to atone for sin and the cleansing of sin happens with the sprinkling of the blood on the alter of bunt offerings. This is the cleansing of the individual from their sins that takes place in the daily ministration of the Priesthood. The yearly ministration of the Priesthood is the cleansing of the sanctuary and the removal of all the sins from God's people from the presence of God which are transferred to the scapegoat which is led by a strong man into the wilderness.

    [8], And AARON SHALL CAST LOTS UPON THE TWO GOATS; ONE LOT FOR THE LORD, AND THE OTHER LOT FOR THE SCAPEGOAT [עֲזָאזֵל that is ʻăzâʼzêl].
    [9], And AARON SHALL BRING THE GOAT UPON WHICH THE LORD'S LOT FELL, AND OFFER HIM FOR A SIN OFFERING.

    Note: The Lords goat is for sin atonement for Gods’ people, while the other goat is the scapegoat. Also, please note that the Hebrew word used for the English translation to “scapegoat” is עֲזָאזֵל that is ʻăzâʼzêl.

    Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, Unabridged - H5799

    H5799. azazel
    עֲזָאזֵל noun [masculine] entire removal (reduplicated intensive (Ges§ 30 n. Sta§ 124 a), abstract, √ [עזל] = Arabic remove, see BährSymb. ii. 668 Winii. 659 ff. Me SchenkelBL. i. 256; > most, proper name of spirit haunting desert, Thes Di DrHastings, DB [a fallen angel, Lev 16:8ff. being late, according to CheZAW xv (1895), 153 ff., Ency. Bib., who derives from עזזאֿל; compare BenzEncy. Bib.], as in Jewish angelology, where probably based on interpret. of 16:8ff.; name not elsewhere); — ׳ע 16:8, 10 (twice in verse); 16:26 in ritual of Day of Atonement, = entire removal of sin and guilt from sacred places into desert on back of goat, symbol of entire forgiveness.

    Note: while the daily ministration of the Priesthood removes all sin from God's people in the Sanctuary through the ministration of transference of the sin of the sinner to the sin offering the sin remains inside the Sanctuary where it is applied to the alter of burnt offering and at the base of the alter through animal sacrifice where the remainder of the sin offering is prepared and eaten by the Priests.

    According to the scriptures in Leviticus 16 is the the yearly ministration of the Priesthood that is responsible for the removal of all sin from the presence of God and the cleansing of the Sanctuary from all the sins of Gods' people brought into the Sanctuary and the presence of God through blood atonement which is then transferred in the same manner that the sinner transferred their sins to the sin offering but this time to the live scapegoat.

    [10], But THE GOAT, ON WHICH THE LOT FELL TO BE THE SCAPEGOAT [עֲזָאזֵל that is ʻăzâʼzêl], SHALL BE PRESENTED ALIVE BEFORE THE LORD, TO MAKE AN ATONEMENT WITH HIM, and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness.

    Note: God is making the final atonement through the cleansing of the sanctuary and removal of sin from His presence, by sending all sin from Gods’ people back to the originator of all sin Azazel (scapegoat) Satan. Leviticus 16:11-14 then talks about the High Priest offering sin atonement for himself and his family and using the censor of incense and continues in verse 15...

    [15], Then shall HE KILL THE GOAT OF THE SIN OFFERING, THAT IS FOR THE PEOPLE, AND BRING HIS BLOOD WITHIN THE VAIL, AND DO WITH THAT BLOOD AS HE DID WITH THE BLOOD OF THE BULLOCK, AND SPRINKLE IT UPON THE MERCY SEAT, AND BEFORE THE MERCY SEAT:

    Note: It is "the Lords goat" that is the sin offering that is killed for the people (not the scapegoat Azazel) and it is "the Lords goat" whos blood is used for final sin atonement and the cleansing of the Sanctuary while "the scapegoat; Azazel" remains alive.

    [16], And HE SHALL [the Lords goat] MAKE AN ATONEMENT FOR THE HOLY PLACE, BECAUSE OF THE UNCLEANNESS OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, AND BECAUSE OF THEIR TRANSGRESSIONS IN ALL THEIR SINS: AND SO SHALL HE DO FOR THE TABERNACLE OF THE CONGREGATION, THAT REMAINETH AMONG THEM IN THE MIDST OF THEIR UNCLEANNESS.

    Note: it is "the Lords goat that is used for making atonement and cleansing of the Sanctuary and Gods' people. Scripture defines sin as the cause of uncleanness and defilement which is why the Sanctuary was to be cleaned once a year on the great day of atonement (see Isaiah 6:5-7; compare Matthew 15:7; 18-19; Isaiah 64:6 etc).

    [17], And there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation when he goeth in TO MAKE AN ATONEMENT IN THE HOLY PLACE, until he come out, and have made an atonement for himself, and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel.
    [18], And HE SHALL GO OUT UNTO THE ALTAR THAT IS BEFORE THE LORD, AND MAKE AN ATONEMENT FOR IT; AND SHALL TAKE OF THE BLOOD OF THE BULLOCK, AND OF THE BLOOD OF THE GOAT, AND PUT IT UPON THE HORNS OF THE ALTAR ROUND ABOUT.
    [19], And HE SHALL SPRINKLE OF THE BLOOD UPON IT WITH HIS FINGER SEVEN TIMES, AND CLEANSE IT, AND HALLOW IT FROM THE UNCLEANNESS OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL.
    [20], And WHEN HE HATH MADE AN END OF RECONCILING THE HOLY PLACE, AND THE TABERNACLE OF THE CONGREGATION, AND THE ALTAR, HE SHALL BRING THE LIVE GOAT:

    Note: blood sacrifice is used here for the cleansing of the Sanctuary and Gods people on the Great day of atonement in the yearly ministration of the Priesthood.

    [21], And AARON SHALL LAY BOTH HIS HANDS UPON THE HEAD OF THE LIVE GOAT, AND CONFESS OVER HIM ALL THE INIQUITIES OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, AND ALL THEIR TRANSGRESSIONS IN ALL THEIR SINS, PUTTING THEM UPON THE HEAD OF THE GOAT, AND SHALL SEND HIM AWAY BY THE HAND OF A FIT MAN INTO THE WILDERNESS:

    Note: The great high Priest on the day of atonement was to lay his hands on the scapegoats head just like the sinner did in transferring his sin to the sin offering under the daily ministration of the Priesthood. The high Priest was to confess all the sins of the children of Israel brought into the Sanctuary throughout the year and transfer them to the scapegoat (Azazel). So we see here there is a contradiction in your teachings. If the sins of Gods people were no longer inside the Sanctuary throughout the year then there would be no need to transfer them to the scapegoat.

    [22], And THE GOAT SHALL BEAR UPON HIM ALL THEIR INIQUITIES UNTO A LAND NOT INHABITED: AND HE SHALL LET GO THE GOAT IN THE WILDERNESS.

    Note: Just as the scapegoat who bares all the sins returned to it from the yearly ministration alive to the wilderness, Satan the originator of all the sins of the people of God have their sins returned to him and led away by an angel bound 1000 years in a bottomless pit (Revelation 20:1-3).

    [23], And Aaron shall come into the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall put off the linen garments, which he put on when he went into the holy place, and shall leave them there:
    [24], And he shall wash his flesh with water in the holy place, and put on his garments, and come forth, AND OFFER HIS BURNT OFFERING, AND THE BURNT OFFERING OF THE PEOPLE, AND MAKE AN ATONEMENT FOR HIMSELF, AND FOR THE PEOPLE.
    [25], And the fat of the sin offering shall he burn upon the altar.
    [26], And he that let go the goat for the scapegoat shall wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in water, and afterward come into the camp.
    [27], And the bullock for the sin offering, and the goat for the sin offering, whose blood was brought in TO MAKE ATONEMENT IN THE HOLY PLACE, shall one carry forth without the camp; and they shall burn in the fire their skins, and their flesh, and their dung.
    [28], And he that burneth them shall wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in water, and afterward he shall come into the camp.
    [29], And THIS SHALL BE A STATUTE FOR EVER unto you: that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, ye shall afflict your souls, and do no work at all, whether it be one of your own country, or a stranger that sojourneth among you:
    My view is shown above through the scriptures outlined in the daily and the yearly ministrations of the Priesthood.
    This is not difficult when viewed through the scriptures as seen in the daily and yearly ministrations of the Priesthood. Both have a different purpose in the Sanctuary service and Gods' plan of salvation for all mankind. Your view here is combining the daily and yearly ministrations of the Priesthood into the daily only. This is not biblical or is it supported anywhere in the scriptures.
    This of course was simply a distraction and a change of subject matter to something we were not discussing earlier. We were discussing the process of sin atonement under the old covenant Sanctuary system in context to the daily and yearly ministration of the Priesthood in application to the heavenly Priesthood under the new covenant with Jesus as our great high Priest ministering on our behalf based on better promises. Your claims fall apart here when viewed in light of the yearly ministration of the Priesthood as shown in our discussion and the cleansing of the Sanctuary on the great day of atonement and the removal of all sin from the presence of the Lord.

    more to come...
     
  14. LoveGodsWord

    LoveGodsWord Well-Known Member

    +5,510
    Australia
    SDA
    Married
    You may want to consider here that the death penalty was applied under civil law of Israel for nearly everyone of God's 10 commandments to any person who was caught unrepentant, openly and publically breaking them. (e.g. 1st Commandment (Exodus 20:3), Thou shalt have no other gods before me (Deuteronomy 17:1-5; 14:6-10; Exodus 22:20); 2nd Commandment, (Exodus 20:4) Thou shalt not make unto thee any idols (Exodus 20:4; Deuteronomy 27: 15); 3rd Commandment (Exodus 20:7), Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vain (Leviticus 24:16); 4th Commandment Sabbath (Exodus 20:8-11) see Exodus 31:14-15; 35:2; 5th commandment (Exodus 20:12) honor your father and mother see Exodus 21:15-17; 6th commandment thou shalt not kill (Exodus 20:13) see Leviticus 24:17; Numbers 35:31-33; 7th commandment thou shalt not commit Adultery (Exodus 20:14) see Leviticus 20:10; John 8:3-5; 8th Commandment thou shall not steal (Exodus 20:15) but only applied to man stealing or kidnapping (Exodus 21:16); 9th commandment (Exodus 20:16) thou shall not bear false witness see Deuteronomy 19:15-21 and the 10th commandments thou shall not covet (Exodus 20:17) see Joshua 7:21-25). This was to teach God's people that the wages of sin is death.
    This is absolutely not true whatsoever and absolutely a false claim that has no truth in it. So lets deal with these claims in a detailed scripture response. You were provided a detailed scripture response showing from the scriptures that under the daily ministration of the Priesthood throughout the year, in order for Gods people to receive God's forgiveness for their sins they needed to bring themselves and a sin offering into the Sanctuary. In the presence of a Priest and the Lord the sinner was to put their hands on the head of the sin offering transferring their sins to the sin offering. Once this was done they were to kill the sin offering and the blood was collected. This was because the sin offering pays the penalty of death for the sinners sin (representing Christs sacrifice).

    The blood of the sin offering was then collected by the Priest to make atonement by sprinkling the blood of the sin offering onto the alter of burnt offering with the rest of the blood being poured out at the base of the alter (see Leviticus 4:22-35). The rest of the sin offering was then prepared by the Priest and could be eaten or consumed as a burnt offering. At this point there was no more sin with the sinner who was forgiven and cleansed from their sins typified in Christ daily ministration in 1 John 1:9. So the sins of Gods people under the daily ministration of the Priesthood remained through both the death of the sin offering and blood atonement on the alter of burnt offering inside the Sanctuary.

    It was then shown through the scriptures in Leviticus 16 that the yearly ministration of the Priesthood on the great day of atonement that was responsible for the cleansing of the Sanctuary and the removal of all the sins of the people of God accumulated throughout the year that was then removed from the presence of God to the scapegoat. Now all of the above here is simply taken from the scriptures as outlined in the both the daily and yearly ministration of the Priesthood.

    Now think about it. If sin contamination was not in the Sanctuary their would be no need for the Sanctuary to be cleansed on the great day of atonement. If there was no sin in the Sanctuary brought into the Sanctuary from Gods' people throughout the year then there would be no need for the removal of all the sins of the people of God throughout the year from the presence of God being transferred to the scapegoat (Leviticus 16). This alone which is all supported by scripture you do not say exists shows your teachings and claims here are not biblical. Your view here is seeking to link the two ministrations of the daily and yearly work of the Priesthood into the daily. This is simply not biblical or supported in the scriptures as shown above.
    Well that is not true. As shown through the scriptures already, of course the daily and the yearly ministration of the Priesthood for sin atonement for God's people is different. This is shown in detail for the daily ministration of the Priesthood and sin atonement for the common person in Leviticus 4:22-35 and Leviticus 4 in general with slight variations to sin offerings for the Priest and the rulers of the people as well as collective sin for God's people.

    Where as the yearly ministration of the Priesthood is outlined in Leviticus 16. The daily ministration of the Priesthood is for atonement for individual people for seeking God's forgiveness for specific sins that they become aware of. While the yearly ministration of the Priesthood as outlined in Leviticus 16 was for the final collective atonement of all of God's people and the High Priest before the new year and the cleansing of the Sanctuary from all the sins of God's people brought into it throughout the year and the removal of all the sins of God's people throughout the year from the presence of the Lord being transferred to the scapegoat who was led by a strong man into the wilderness.
    This was simply a distraction to our discussion and an argument that no one was arguing about and something that I already pointed out very early in our discussion. The focal point of our discussion however was in regards to sin atonement in the daily and the yearly ministration of the Priesthood to the individual common people for specific sin (not collective) and it's application to the new covenant and Christ as our great high Priest in the heavenly Sanctuary that the Lord pitched and not man who now ministers on our behalf based on better promises *Hebrews 7:1-25; Hebrews 8:1-13; Hebrews 9:1-27 and Hebrews 10:1-22.
    This has been demonstrated in the scriptures above already in the daily (Leviticus 4:22-35) and the yearly (Leviticus 16) ministrations of the Priesthood. The daily is the removal and cleansing of sin from the sinner while the yearly is the final atonement for God's people and the cleansing of the sanctuary from all the sins of the people of God brought into it throughout the year and the removal of all sin from the presence of God to the scapegoat. If your version of the truth of God's Word was correct there would be no need for the great day of atonement. Just the fact that there is shows your teachings are not biblical and proves your view is not biblical.

    more to come...
     
  15. LoveGodsWord

    LoveGodsWord Well-Known Member

    +5,510
    Australia
    SDA
    Married

    As shown through the scriptures already your interpretation of Leviticus 6:30 and Leviticus 16:17 does not support your position. Atonement for the holy place in Leviticus 6:30 is in context to the daily ministration of the Priesthood but application here is in context to either sin committed by the Priest or the collective specific sin of Gods' people (e.g. idolatry) not individual sin atonement for the common person! In the context of Leviticus 6:30 which is to the daily ministration of the Priesthood if the Priest or collective Israel sinned a specific sin to make atonement and seek God's forgiveness the Priest had to bring specific sin offerings (bull) and once killed by the Priest the blood was collected and sprinkled seven time on the curtain vale of the holy place and also applied to the horns of the alter of incense inside the holy place for the Priest (see Leviticus 4:2-21) or the alter of burnt offering for God's people.

    Under both situations unlike the individual sin offerings of the common people Leviticus 6:30 says under these situations the sin offering cannot be eaten but must be burnt. These were specific sins applied to the Priesthood and God's people collectively not individually for specific sin. The atonement being made here is not for the holy place but for the sins of the Priest or Gods' people collectively for specific sin. The cleansing of the sanctuary according to the scriptures for all the sins of Gods people did not happen until the great day of atonement as shown in Leviticus 16. Of course sin is transferred to the holy place in the case of the sin of the Priest in the daily ministration of the Priesthood as it is transferred there from the sins of the Priest of Gods' people collectively being transferred by the Priest to the sin offering which is used to make atonement for the Priest or God's people.

    Leviticus 16:17 is simply saying no one could be in the Sanctuary while the yearly ministration of the cleansing of the Sanctuary was being conducted. As posted earlier these scriptures do not support your view. Your disregarding scripture context and mixing up the application of the daily and yearly ministrations of the Priesthood in regards to the common people.
    Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
    25-28. This is the law of the sin offering—It was slain, and the fat and inwards, after being washed and salted, were burnt upon the altar. But the rest of the carcass belonged to the officiating priest. He and his family might feast upon it—only, however, within the precincts of the tabernacle; and none else were allowed to partake of it but the members of a priestly family—and not even they, if under any ceremonial defilement. The flesh on all occasions was boiled or sodden, with the exception of the paschal lamb, which was roasted [Ex 12:8, 9]

    The scriptures you have provided here are in application to the laws of the sin offering. The context here is that of the flesh being considered holy and could only be eaten by the holy Priest in the Sanctuary under normal circumstances (see Leviticus 6:29-30). The flesh has nothing to do with blood atonement and the cleansing of the Sanctuary on the great day of atonement, inside the Sanctuary accept payment of the penalty of sin that is transferred from the sinner to the sin offering as shown earlier through the daily ministration of the Priesthood in Leviticus 4:22-35. It is the blood atonement that brings God's forgiveness of sins and transferring the sin from the sinner to the sin offerings and it's death that pays the penalty for sin.

    Actually no. We see two ministrations of the Priesthood as already shown through the scriptures. This includes the daily ministration of the Priesthood which atones for all the individual sins of the people of God on a daily basis as shown in Leviticus 4 and the yearly ministration in the great day of atonement as shown in Leviticus 16 which is the final atonement and the cleansing of the Sanctuary and the removal of all sin from the presence of God to the scapegoat.
    If that were true there would be no need for the cleansing of the Sanctuary and the removal from all the sins of the people of God committed throughout the year that are transferred to the scapegoat. Just the fact that there is a yearly ministration of the Priesthood proves that your teachings here are not supported in the scriptures as both the daily ministration of the Priesthood and the yearly ministration of the Priesthood prove your claims here are not true.

    Take care.
     
  16. LoveGodsWord

    LoveGodsWord Well-Known Member

    +5,510
    Australia
    SDA
    Married
    Sadly that is simply a claim that is being made that is a distortion of what is being said and a distortion of the truth of Gods' Word. This is because if anyone understands the yearly ministration of the Priesthood they would know that there are two goats in the final atonement for the people of God one in the scriptures is called the "scapegoat" and the other is called ''the Lord's goat'' at which time the High Priest cast lots to determine which is the Lords and which is the scapegoat.

    Note: only sin offering and blood atonement pays the price of sin from the sinner paying the penalty of sin which is death. In the yearly ministration of the Priesthood only the "the Lords goat" was used for the final sin atonement and was sacrificed to pay to penalty of the collective sins of people of God. As well as this the yearly ministration of the Priesthood is different to the daily. The daily ministration of the Priesthood was for sin atonement among other things through blood sacrifice so sin atonement through blood sacrifice was made in the daily ministration of the Priesthood and the yearly and it is only blood atonement and the death of the sin offering that could pay the penalty of sin and atone for sins giving the sinner God's forgiveness.

    The yearly ministration of the Priesthood is different to the daily in that the yearly ministration of the Priesthood on the great day of atonement was not only the final atonement for God's people through he death of the sin offering and blood atonement but also it was made for the cleansing of the whole sanctuary and the removal of sin from the presence of God to the scapegoat that does not die for the sins of God's people so it cannot be an atonement like some are claiming here. Only "the Lords goat" was the sin atonement for God's people not the scapegoat.

    Jesus represent "the Lord's goat" that is sacrificed as a blood offering for sin representing Jesus as Gods true sacrifice dying for the sins of the world. The scapegoat represents satan because he is the instigator of all sin and temptation to sin so he in turn bears the ultimate responsibility and final punishment from God for all the sins atoned for Gods' people by Jesus as well as all the sins of the world.

    This is why in the yearly ministration of the Priesthood the great High Priest after cleansing the Sanctuary and making the final atonement for all of God's people places his hands on the scapegoat transferring all the sins to the scapegoat and removing it from God's presence into the wilderness by a strong man (Leviticus 16).

    This is fulfilled as the last act and final removal of all sin from the presence of God at the second coming as shown in Revelation 20:1-3 where it is written; [1], And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. [2], And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, [3], And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season. And again after the final atonement for God's people and the heavenly Sanctuary is cleansed; "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still. And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie." - Revelation 22:11-15.

    So this claim that we believe that Satan here as the scapegoat is an atonement for sin is a misrepresentation of what is being shared here through the scriptures that could not be further from the truth.

    Take Care.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2021
  17. LoveGodsWord

    LoveGodsWord Well-Known Member

    +5,510
    Australia
    SDA
    Married
    See post # 456 linked
     
  18. LoveGodsWord

    LoveGodsWord Well-Known Member

    +5,510
    Australia
    SDA
    Married
    According to the scriptures your disregarding here between the daily ministration of the Priesthood in sin atonement through animal sacrifice and blood atonement that is brought inside the Sanctuary and the yearly ministration of the Priesthood which is the final atonement for the sins of Gods' people brought into the Sanctuary throughout the year and the cleansing of the Sanctuary and the removal of all the sins of Gods' people brought into the Sanctuary throughout the year which are transferred to the scapegoat your position here is not biblical as shown and demonstrated in the daily and yearly ministrations of the Priesthood in the Sanctuary in Leviticus 4:22-35 and Leviticus 16. Your claims to Satan being a sin bearer for atonement is a misrepresentation of what has been shared with you and a disregard of the scriptures showing the role of "the Lords goat" and "the scapegoat" as shown in Leviticus 16.
    Read Leviticus 16. "The Lords goat" does not identify to "the scapegoat". Neither does "the scapegoat atone for our sins. If you understood the above you would not be asking these questions which is a misrepresentation of what I have been sharing here between the daily and the yearly ministration of the Priesthood and how they apply under the new covenants application and the work of Jesus as our great high Priest in the heavenly Sanctuary that the Lord pitched and not man.
    That is not true. I respectfully disagree. You were already given a detailed scripture response showing that the daily ministration of the Priesthood brings all the sins of God's people into the Sanctuary through sin offerings and blood sacrifice in Leviticus 4:22-35.

    You were also shown that difference between the two ministrations of the Priesthood in the daily sin atonement for the people of God and the yearly collective atonement for the people of God and the cleansing of the sanctuary and the removal of all the sins of God's people throughout the year to the scapegoat.

    If your view were true it deletes the yearly ministration of the Priesthood because there would be no sin to atone for no cleansing of the Sanctuary from all the sins of God's people that were brought into it through out the year and not sin to transfer to the scapegoat. Yet there it all is written before you disagreeing with your teachings in Leviticus 16 as the yearly ministration of the Priesthood in the Sanctuary service for sin atonement. Leviticus 16 and the yearly ministration of the Priesthood proves that your claims and teachings here are not biblical.

    Your remaining posts are repetition that have already been addressed in some detail through the scriptures already. I did not see the need to re-address them or cut and paste content already shared with you again that has already been addressed in earlier posts from the scriptures so might leave it here for now.

    Take Care.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2021
  19. LoveGodsWord

    LoveGodsWord Well-Known Member

    +5,510
    Australia
    SDA
    Married
    @Leaf473

    I will just touch on this a little and make this the last response for now. I think what your not considering here is that there is two goats here in the yearly ministration of sin atonement. Of the two goats listed above cast by lots it was only "the Lords goat" that was used for blood atonement. "The scapegoat" was not used for sin atonement for the people of God so your claims of Satan being the atonement for sin is misleading as he does not atone for anyone's sin in context to sin atonement through blood sacrifice. The only way the sins of God's people could be atoned for was always and only through blood sacrifice to atone for the sins of God's people. Therefore it is impossible for "the scapegoat" to atone for the sins of God's people because it wad kept alive once the sins of God's people are transferred to it. At this time however the sins of God's people had already been atoned for through the blood sacrifice of "the Lords goat". (Leviticus 16).

    Now let's apply the types now and see if in your view "the scapegoat represents Jesus in the new covenant as applied in the Heavenly Sanctuaries application to the yearly ministration of the Priesthood. We agree that Jesus represents Gods true sacrifice for the sins of the world once and for all through blood atonement. Therefore Jesus represents "the Lords goat". We also agree that in the heavenly Sanctuary our great High Priest also represents Jesus who makes intercession before God on our behalf.

    So this is where your dilemma starts if your applying "the scapegoat" to Jesus....

    1. In the great day of atonement as applied in the new covenant Jesus being our great high Priest and the Lords goat. How can Jesus represent "the scapegoat"? This does not make any sense because in your view of Jesus being "the scapegoat" you have Jesus as our Great high Priest, who is also our sin offering for blood atonement (the Lords goat), laying His hands on His head confessing all the sins of all God's people and re-transferring all the sins of God's people to himself where he then is led out from the presence of God to remove all sin from the presence of God? If you think this through to new covenant application it just does not work.

    2. You also run into further problems here by making Jesus "the scapegoat". By making Jesus the scapegoat your saying that blood atonement is inadequate for God's people to receive forgiveness of sins. The problem arises for your view here because by the time this final part of the Day of Atonement ritual had arrived, all blood sacrifices had been completed. The "Lord's goat" had been slain and its blood sprinkled before the mercy seat. This sacrifice atoned for all the sins of the people. This expiation in your view that Jesus is "the scapegoat" makes Christ's blood atonement inadequate, partial, incomplete, needing further remediation from the scapegoat. Christs sacrifice however and blood atonement however was complete, finished. No supplement, no other sacrifice, could be required. "When he has made an end of atoning for the Holy Place, the tabernacle of meeting and the altar, he shall bring the live goat" (Leviticus 16:20).

    3. If a scapegoat represented Christ bearing away, finally and for all, the sins of His people, we have the erroneous situation as outlined above. The high priest was to lay his hands (in this case, and this case only, both hands) upon the scapegoat, thus ritually transferring confessed sins to that animal. To make this application to the great anti-typical service unfolded in the book of Hebrews, we would have Christ (the High Priest) placing believers' sins upon Himself (the scapegoat). Not only does this not make any sense; you have the further problem of it thus appearing as though the Calvary sacrifice was deficient, that Christ did not there complete His work of expiation, or that some other figure was necessary to illustrate its sufficiency.

    In examining the transferal of sin to the scapegoat, it is significant to note that the goat was not treated as all other animal sacrifices were — slain as atonement for sin. A sacrifice was valid as an atonement for transgressions only as it died, as there was spilled blood. Thus, Jesus was "set forth to be a propitiation [for us] by his blood" (Romans 3:25). It is "through his blood" that we have redemption (Ephesians 1:7). Preserving the goat alive tells that Azazel had another purpose because shed blood was necessary for a sin offering, in what way could an animal kept alive be considered such an offering? In what respect would it represent Christ? - It cannot. To say that the scapegoat, which played a part only after the atonement was complete, represented Christ is to blur the atonement, to suggest it is not sufficient, that something else was needed to complete it and make it effective. Such an idea as having Jesus representing "the scapegoat" is simply not biblical. (Source: The scapegoat)

    Take Care.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2021
  20. tall73

    tall73 Sophia7's husband Supporter

    +4,849
    Christian
    Married

    I agree, this is a huge issue.

    LGW asserts that the scapegoat is not used for atonement.

    However, the text says:

    Lev 16:10 But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat, shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness.


    Nor has LGW described how Satan can bear anyone else's sins, since he bears his own.

    And he claims I am misrepresenting his view. But Ellen White is considered inspired by the Adventist church, and she says the following in the Great Controversy:

    It was seen, also, that while the sin offering pointed to Christ as a sacrifice, and the high priest represented Christ as a mediator, the scapegoat typified Satan, the author of sin, upon whom the sins of the truly penitent will finally be placed. When the high priest, by virtue of the blood of the sin offering, removed the sins from the sanctuary, he placed them upon the scapegoat. When Christ, by virtue of His own blood, removes the sins of His people from the heavenly sanctuary at the close of His ministration, He will place them upon Satan, who, in the execution of the judgment, must bear the final penalty.


    This quote makes it plain that Ellen White sees the sins placed on Satan, who must "bear the final penalty".

    Satan cannot bear the sins of God's people. He bears his own sins.

    LGW claims I am misrepresenting his view. But we will see what Ellen White says again, since the SDA consider her inspired.

    LGW says:

    But Ellen White says:

    The wicked receive their recompense in the earth. Proverbs 11:31. They “shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts.” Malachi 4:1. Some are destroyed as in a moment, while others suffer many days. All are punished “according to their deeds.” The sins of the righteous having been transferred to Satan, he is made to suffer not only for his own rebellion, but for all the sins which he has caused God's people to commit. His punishment is to be far greater than that of those whom he has deceived. After all have perished who fell by his deceptions, he is still to live and suffer on. In the cleansing flames the wicked are at last destroyed, root and branch—Satan the root, his followers the branches. The full penalty of the law has been visited; the demands of justice have been met; and heaven and earth, beholding, declare the righteousness of Jehovah. GC 673.1


    She states clearly that all the sins of the righteous are transferred to satan, which he suffers for, until he is destroyed, and that this is the satisfying of the law.

    But it is Jesus who satisfied the law for us. satan never did.

    Now if Ellen White does not represent LGW's view, then I would be happy to say that his view is not the same as hers. But her view does make satan bear the sins of the people of God. And that is completely wrong. Satan bears his own sin. The wicked bear their own sin.

    And Jesus bore our sins, died for them, atoned for the sins, and totally removed every element of sin from the dwelling of His people. He is the one who makes atonement, and certainly not satan.
     
Loading...