• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

the heavenly sanctuary doctrine (and the sabbath)

mrasell

Newbie
Jan 28, 2010
468
11
Visit site
✟23,172.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I've written two books "Nehemiah the Sabbath Reformer" and "Exploring the Heavenly Sanctuary" which cover the basic SDA special truths.

The sanctuary is the key to the great controversy, we need to know if it is a real place and what its purpose is, especially as it reveals Jesus, our merciful High Priest who ever intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25).

Nehemiah rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem under intense persecution, which is a spiritual lesson of how God's moral law will be rebuild under pressure, especially the biggest hole - the Sabbath.

If you have any questions about these doctrines please post them.

God Bless

Marc Rasell
 

Cribstyl

Veteran
Jun 13, 2006
8,993
2,068
✟108,451.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
With all due respects, congrats on your achievements....(Welcome to CF)



Where is the heavenly sanctuary and what are it's dementions and
how many rooms?
What room or compartment did Christ occupy from the cross- 1840s?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Byfaithalone1

The gospel is Jesus Christ!
May 3, 2007
3,602
79
✟26,689.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I've written two books "Nehemiah the Sabbath Reformer" and "Exploring the Heavenly Sanctuary" which cover the basic SDA special truths.

"Special" is well chosen adjective.

The sanctuary is the key to the great controversy,

If there was ever a controversy, the outcome has been decided. We have nothing to fear.

Nehemiah rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem under intense persecution, which is a spiritual lesson of how God's moral law will be rebuild under pressure, especially the biggest hole - the Sabbath.

I suspect that you are only advocating for a portion of God's law. Picking and choosing seems to be rather common.

If you have any questions about these doctrines please post them.

I really don't. My questions about these doctrines were satisfied a long time ago. I suspect that this is also true for the others who post here (if I've misrepresented anyone, please let me know).

BFA
 
Upvote 0

Joe67

Newbie
Sep 8, 2008
1,266
7
✟23,977.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
marc,

The question is , "Where do we dwell?"

Rev 12:10-12
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.

12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time. KJV

Joe
 
Upvote 0

VictorC

Jesus - that's my final answer
Mar 25, 2008
5,228
479
Northern Colorado
✟29,537.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I've written two books "Nehemiah the Sabbath Reformer" and "Exploring the Heavenly Sanctuary" which cover the basic SDA special truths.
Those of us with a history on CARM know of your announced books, and have commented on them. In fact, I will remind you of a post that answered you concerning the Sanctuary Doctrine that I wrote last December:

Originally Posted by rasell
In Bible history the majority tended to be in apostasy, which is why the Bible speaks so much about a remnant of God's people. To follow the majority is dangerous, only Scripture is safe.
The Day of Atonement ministry includes present intercession, and if you accept the need for intercession there is no conflict which a final atonement. The intercession is based upon a complete sacrifice - no one is disputing that.
Hebrews 7 describes Jesus acting as our Intercessor in the present tense when this epistle was written.
Hebrews 8-10 describes Jesus completing the task in the Holiest place of the heavenly sanctuary long before this epistle was written.

Did 1844 change that intercession?
NO.
1844 did not make any transition - it was a non-event.

Originally Posted by rasell
Jesus and the apostles were all Sabbath keepers, and while Paul speaks of the end of the Mosaic laws, he also affirms the moral law in a number of places such as Romans 2:17-23; 7:7-12; 13:8-10.
Jesus and the apostles were not sabbath "keepers" after the resurrection, as they had entered into the permanent rest the sabbath led to. You will not find them affirming the burnt offerings nor the Levitical priesthood required to keep the sabbath day holy. You also need to be reminded of what Romans 7 says:

6 But now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter.
7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, “You shall not covet


That's a quote from Exodus 20:17 and Deuteronomy 5:21, identifying the law we have been delivered from as the ten commandments.

Some more:

8 But sin, taking opportunity by the commandment, produced in me all manner of evil desire. For apart from the law sin was dead. 9 I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was to bring life, I found to bring death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it killed me.

Hmmm. The law kills.
Then we see the usual SDA quote:

12 Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.

Which is followed by:

13 Has then what is good become death to me? Certainly not! But sin, that it might appear sin, was producing death in me through what is good, so that sin through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Yes, the law is holy, just, good, spiritual - and very lethal to all those who are not! And Paul admits that he is carnal, sold under sin.
You had better start looking for a Redeemer!
Originally Posted by rasell
On the one hand you refer to the majority to reject Adventist teachings, but on the other hand you reject the majority when they affirm the moral law, as virtually every denomination does affirm the moral law and Ten Commadments, as well as the Reformers. There is clear evidence for this is the writings of Martin Luther, other reformers, the westminster confession, anglican 39 articles of faith (article 7) and other places.
Marc, we have another thread that shows how you misquoted Martin Luther, we have already examined the errors of the Westminster Confession in the past, and I note that these uninspired works are where you turn your attention to instead of Scripture.

I also note that the "majority" you appeal to is actually the Roman Catholic Church - their catechism affirms the continuence of the first covenant (the ten commandments) and because of their failure to affirm God's redemption from it with the death of the Testator, they introduce venal sins and purgatory to finish their transgressions. The SDA church created the Investigative Judgment to finish their transgressions. What's the difference?
They both stem from the same error, using different mechanisms to deal with their departure from the Bible.

The SDA church loves the Roman Catholic Church so much they imported aspects of their theology into theirs.
Originally Posted by rasell
So do you accept all that the majority say or not? Or the Scriptures?
You were the one who appealed to what you had called the majority, and claimed that I didn't when you wrote "you reject the majority when they affirm the moral law".

I accept the Scriptures, which declare our deliverence from the law identified by a quote from the ten commandments.
You do not.
Adventism is not a remnant church, but rather a departure from "the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 1:3).
The responses you made to this post never responded to my point that nothing happened in 1844. There was is still is no change to the continuous intercession we enjoy from our High Priest, which was written in the present tense as it appears in Hebrews 7:25.
The sanctuary is the key to the great controversy, we need to know if it is a real place and what its purpose is, especially as it reveals Jesus, our merciful High Priest who ever intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25).
And as I pointed out, 1844 made no change to that intercession.
Nehemiah rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem under intense persecution, which is a spiritual lesson of how God's moral law will be rebuild under pressure, especially the biggest hole - the Sabbath.
Until you find support for making burnt offerings that God has no pleasure in, you haven't found any support for the sabbath replacing the eternal rest that God has given us entrance into. Scripture speaks of the law containing shadows of the realities they were designed to lead us into, such as Hebrews 10:1:

For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect.

God was not content to leave us in the shadow.
He has brought us into His reality: For he who has entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His (Hebrews 4:10).
If you have any questions about these doctrines please post them.
Many of those contributing to the progressive Adventist forum have had these questions answered a long time ago.
Marc Rasell
Welcome to the forum :wave:
Just as those expecting to run to the hills to avoid the national Sunday law, you will find that the same people you thought to be running from have been waiting for you with open arms.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

mrasell

Newbie
Jan 28, 2010
468
11
Visit site
✟23,172.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
With all due respects, congrats on your achievements....(Welcome to CF)



Where is the heavenly sanctuary and what are it's dementions and
how many rooms?
What room or compartment did Christ occupy from the cross- 1840s?

1. in heaven
2. 2 rooms
3. the holy place

(the biblical basis for my answers is in my book, I can expand on this if needed)
 
Upvote 0

mrasell

Newbie
Jan 28, 2010
468
11
Visit site
✟23,172.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
You're a wise man, can you present a case with associated scriptures, for sabbath being instituted at creation?

In my book on Nehemiah, one of the chapters is devoted to this whole question of the origin of the Sabbath.

One has to look at when the Sabbath was sanctified (Gen. 2:2-3) and when the weekly cycle began.
 
Upvote 0

mrasell

Newbie
Jan 28, 2010
468
11
Visit site
✟23,172.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Which sanctuary and compartments does Investigative Judgement take place?
Is the heavenly sanctuary defiled, what has caused the heavenly sanctuary to be cleansed?

1. in the most holy place

2. yes, the levitical type foreshadowed this defilement, when either the blood was transferred to the sanctuary or the flesh eaten by the priest Lev. 10:18. The cleansing is based on the blood of the Lord's goat which represents Christ's blood. The cleansing is happening now, and when it is complete, Christ will return.
 
Upvote 0

mrasell

Newbie
Jan 28, 2010
468
11
Visit site
✟23,172.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
heavenly sanctuary, not real, and not needed.... the concept is a product of cornfield theology.... Crib and BFA have summed it up quite well...

Hebrews 8:1-2
1Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
2A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
 
Upvote 0

StormyOne

Senior Veteran
Aug 21, 2005
5,424
47
65
Alabama
✟5,866.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hebrews 8:1-2
1Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
2A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
God is a spirit, so he would need a throne because? Likewise God is omnipresent.... does he really have to be positioned in one place? I don't think so.... Hebrews... who wrote that again?
 
Upvote 0

Cribstyl

Veteran
Jun 13, 2006
8,993
2,068
✟108,451.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Originally Posted by Cribstyl
With all due respects, congrats on your achievements....(Welcome to CF)



Where is the heavenly sanctuary and what are it's dementions and
how many rooms?
What room or compartment did Christ occupy from the cross- 1840s?
mrasell said:
1. in heaven
2. 2 rooms
3. the holy place

(the biblical basis for my answers is in my book, I can expand on this if needed)
Thanks for responding....

I guess those 2 rooms you're talking about would be "the holy place " and "the most holy place' ?

Why does texts tell us that Christ ascended to sit at the right hand of the throne? (Is that not in the most Holy place?)
We should hold on to clear doctrines rather than what people derive from prophetic imagery.

Mar 16:19

The question boils down to this: Did Christ ascend to sit on the throne or did He get there in 1844?
Originally Posted by Cribstyl
Which sanctuary and compartments does Investigative Judgement take place?
Is the heavenly sanctuary defiled, what has caused the heavenly sanctuary to be cleansed?
mrasell said:
1. in the most holy place

2. yes, the levitical type foreshadowed this defilement, when either the blood was transferred to the sanctuary or the flesh eaten by the priest Lev. 10:18. The cleansing is based on the blood of the Lord's goat which represents Christ's blood. The cleansing is happening now, and when it is complete, Christ will return.


Hbr 1:3

According to scriptures, Christ's blood (once for all) cleansed and atoned on the cross 2000years ago, not in heaven, not continuously, not 1840's
What He did after that is written clearly for our understanding.

What some people resolve the heavenly sanctuary to be may not be accurate.
Why would Jesus stay in "the holy place" for 1800yrs and nothing is written of His activity therein?
Why do we have as an anchor that He was "within the veil"? Hbr 6:19 and not on the other side of it?


It seem that SDA have additional doctrines about creation and about the resurrection. These teaching are being challenged here and elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

VictorC

Jesus - that's my final answer
Mar 25, 2008
5,228
479
Northern Colorado
✟29,537.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
In my book on Nehemiah, one of the chapters is devoted to this whole question of the origin of the Sabbath.

One has to look at when the Sabbath was sanctified (Gen. 2:2-3) and when the weekly cycle began.
When we look at Genesis 2:2-3, we find the origin of God's "My rest" that Hebrews 4 speaks of so eloquently. As Hebrews reminds us, this rest was a promise yet to be attained by the people who were already observing the sabbath.

1 ¶ Therefore, since a promise remains of entering His rest, let us fear lest any of you seem to have come short of it.
2 For indeed the gospel was preached to us as well as to them; but the word which they heard did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in those who heard it.
3 For we who have believed do enter that rest, as He has said: "So I swore in My wrath, `They shall not enter My rest,'" although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.
4 For He has spoken in a certain place of the seventh day in this way: "And God rested on the seventh day from all His works";
5 and again in this place: "They shall not enter My rest."
6 Since therefore it remains that some must enter it, and those to whom it was first preached did not enter because of disobedience,
7 again He designates a certain day, saying in David, "Today," after such a long time, as it has been said: "Today, if you will hear His voice, Do not harden your hearts."
8 For if Joshua had given them rest, then He would not afterward have spoken of another day.
9 There remains therefore a rest for the people of God.


"That" rest speaks of an eternal rest the sabbath never provided, and it is that rest "we who have believed do enter", which is delineated from the sabbath that Jesus clearly stated was "made for man" in Mark 2:27.

Hebrews 4:4 is a direct quote from Genesis 2:2.
The seventh day was God's rest, and not man's rest. The sabbath didn't exist until it was ordained thousands of years later. Moreover, the rest documented on the seventh day never repeated nor ended. The sabbath repeated every week, and was a mere shadow of God's rest that was not attained by the sabbath: "a promise remains of entering His rest", a comment directed to those who already had the sabbath.
2. yes, the levitical type foreshadowed this defilement, when either the blood was transferred to the sanctuary or the flesh eaten by the priest Lev. 10:18. The cleansing is based on the blood of the Lord's goat which represents Christ's blood. The cleansing is happening now, and when it is complete, Christ will return.
The blood of the offering did not defile the sanctuary, and Hebrews 9:22 specifies that the blood was the agent of cleansing: "according to the law almost all things are purified with blood".

Moreover, the entire narrative of Hebrews 9-10 presents the rites in the heavenly sanctuary in the past tense, including the entrance into the Holiest of Holies (or MHP, "most holy place"), showing that the sanctuary rites were completed before this epistle was written. This is plainly evident in Hebrews 9:

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


BTW, I already know that Hebrews 9:25 refers to the plural ta hagia that renders "Holy Places" as the "Most Holy Place" in this translation (NKJV). It was the annual rite of atonement provided by the earthly high priest that Jesus followed, which was the only time the high priest entered into the Holy Places in the plural - both the HP and MHP. This entrance is documented as a completed act.

Christ was offered once, and atonement is not a continued rite. It exists only as a component of the law ordained under the first covenant, and does not exist in the new covenant at all. As Hebrews 9:15 states concerning this: And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. In order to assert that atonement is a continuing process ("the cleansing is happening now", quoting Marc Rasell), one needs also reject the new covenant in order to claim a rite authorized only under the first covenant is continuing, as the two covenants are not compatible and cannot coexist: "He takes away the first that He may establish the second" (Hebrews 10:9).

SDA Fundamental Belief #9 refers to Christ's "perfect atonement", and then SDA Fundamental Belief #24 contradicts it when it asserts that 1844 introduced a "second and final phase of atonement". Adventism doesn't accept a completed and sufficient "perfect atonement", and that is the fundamental heresy surrounding 1844. It is a theological error of epic proportions, and yet 1844 remains the crux of Adventism, as Ellen White described it as the "foundation and central pillar of the Advent faith":

The scripture which above all others had been both the foundation and central pillar of the Advent faith was the declaration, "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." [DAN. 8:14.] These had been familiar words to all believers in the Lord's soon coming. By the lips of thousands was this prophecy joyfully repeated as the watchword of their faith. All felt that upon the events therein brought to view depended their brightest expectations and most cherished hopes. These prophetic days had been shown to terminate in the autumn of 1844. In common with the rest of the Christian world, Adventists then held that the earth, or some portion of it, was the sanctuary, and that the cleansing of the sanctuary was the purification of the earth by the fires of the last great day. This they understood would take place at the second coming of Christ. Hence the conclusion that Christ would return to the earth in 1844. {4SP 258.1}

Contrary to Ellen's claim, this isn't a belief that Adventism shares "In common with the rest of the Christian world". The rest of the Christian world accepts the narrative presented in the Bible describing a completed atonement that will never be repeated; the heavenly sanctuary has already been cleansed according to a rite never to be repeated.

This is the Adventist rendition of purgatory: their eschatology and soteriology does not accept a completed atonement that has reconciled us to God once and for all. Atonement isn't perfect in their theological outlook.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

mrasell

Newbie
Jan 28, 2010
468
11
Visit site
✟23,172.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Why does texts tell us that Christ ascended to sit at the right hand of the throne? (Is that not in the most Holy place?)

it was in the earthly tabernacle / temples, but that is assuming the heavenly is identical to the earthly. The reality is greater than its shadow. In the heavenly temple God's presence is not limited, and in Revelation 4-5 after Jesus ascended to heaven he is in the holy place in the presence of God. Only later does the most holy place appear Rev. 11:19.

I've gone into more depth to answer this question in my book, in chapters 4-5 of the book I've gone through a detailed explanation.

Paul gives a number of changes in the heavenly temple based on the Hebrews Bible that show the heavenly temple is superior: a better sacrifice, a better temple not made by hands, a new priesthood, a new covenant. So in line with this, the presence of God is not limited, and there is only one priest.

If the presence was limited to the Most Holy in heaven and Christ ascended there, there would be no need for a Holy Place. Yet the heavenly temple is called "ta hagia" which means holy places.

According to scriptures, Christ's blood (once for all) cleansed and atoned on the cross 2000years ago, not in heaven, not continuously, not 1840's
What He did after that is written clearly for our understanding.

The cleansing described in Hebrews is the cleansing of inauguration. The cleansing of the Day of Atonement can only occur on the final day, at the end of the process, not the beginning.

Why would Jesus stay in "the holy place" for 1800yrs and nothing is written of His activity therein?

He was interceeding for us , see Hebrews 7:25, as our High Priest.

Why do we have as an anchor that He was "within the veil"? Hbr 6:19 and not on the other side of it?

This is a reference to the earthly temple, Paul uses the veil of the wilderness tabernacle as a symbol of the high priest gaining access to the Presence of God. It is just a symbol of Christ's entry to the heavenly temple into the presence of God.

However in the heavenly temple, there are difference as I mentioned before. And we are never told exactly what is in the heavenly temple in the book of Hebrews, or where Christ is in that temple. In Hebrews, location is outside of the context of the epistle, it was not relevant to the discussion, for that we have to look to Revelation.

God Bless

Marc
 
Upvote 0