the heavenly sanctuary doctrine (and the sabbath)

[ricker]

Jesus went to the Synagogue on the Sabbath, so that ought to settle the matter, as Lord of the Sabbath he set a good example.

The problem for me is the nearest synagogue is 50 miles away. That's more than a sabbath's day walk.

 

[ricker]

The commandment itself implies that if we cease secular activity we will turn our minds to spiritual things.

In what way does this do what you say?

8 "Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates. 11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

 

[VictorC]

Jesus went to the Synagogue on the Sabbath, so that ought to settle the matter, as Lord of the Sabbath he set a good example.

So your contention is that we should return to the ordinances of Judaism, worship God in a house of Judaism, and basically abandon Christianity altogether, right? Consider this passage from Romans 9:

30 ¶ What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith;
31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness.
32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone.
33 As it is written: "Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense, And whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame."

I think that you have stumbled at the Lord of the sabbath, as unbelieving Israel has. He being the Lord conveys ownership of the sabbath He created, and you have not considered His natural right to take it away to establish the new covenant in His Blood and give us entrance into His permanent rest.

The commandment itself implies that if we cease secular activity we will turn our minds to spiritual things.

Apparently this isn't the case, for you haven't reconciled the sabbath being referred to as a shadow that was designed to lead one to a greater Reality with a view of the sabbath that doesn't appear in the law anywhere.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

Jesus went to the Synagogue on the Sabbath, so that ought to settle the matter, as Lord of the Sabbath he set a good example.

Jesus Christ observed the passover in the way that God commanded the Israelites to observe it. In doing so, did Jesus intend that I should do the same?

BFA

 

[Kira Light]

Jesus Christ observed the passover in the way that God commanded the Israelites to observe it. In doing so, did Jesus intend that I should do the same?

BFA

This is a great point! The SDA's like to point to Jesus as the example of how one should live in order to be saved, but the problem with this is He was PERFECT. How can perfection really be the expectation? It is ridiculous when you think about it.

 

[Joe67]

Thanks, Joe. I am unfamiliar with the concept of primary and secondary worship. Am I right in understanding from your post that one is collective , and one is private? Which is primary, and which is secondary? So neither are in the Spirit? On what is this distinction based on?

Please elaborate. I may be way off in my thoughts.

ricker,

It would be those aspects of the work of Christ as revealed in 1 John 2 where the children's experience, the young men's victory and the father's understanding are witnessed unto us.

Paul and Peter spoke of the things of God in Christ within this manifold witness and gift that is in Jesus our Lord.

The three-fold qualities of grace are witnessed in several different formats/modes of expression in the writings of the apostles.

Romans 4 is a part of the letter that is devoted to the presentation of the history and qualities of justification/imputation. Justification/imputation is witnessed in different modes in Abraham and David. Even imputation as in the inclusion of Sarah in the promise is of an advanced quality of experience than when the Lord first spoke to Abram while still in his father's homeland. Justification/imputation is in the sound and each advanced trial is attended with an increase of grace in the sound of imputation.

In previous years I heard it as only one constant monotone. Now I hear the trumpet increasing in sound as the revelation increases and the experience in grace deepened for each one of his called and elect children concerning whom he has left us a witness.

He left us a witness concerning their experience in imputation that faith should be granted us and righteousness be imputed to us also as it was to them. Children cannot believe unto the victory of the young men, and young men cannot believe unto the understanding of the father's until the fullness of time, times and the dividing of time by the Father of all spirits. Only he can move us from glory to glory in his gift in Christ.

Rom 4:23-25
23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;

24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification. KJV

Joe

 

[Joe67]

Joe, I have no idea what you're talking about. Somehow you hinted at a connection between Revelation 14 and the sabbath, and I'm not alone in noting the connection you alleged is nowhere to be found. Would you like to clarify what the intent of your posts are?

Victor,

Wisdom is justified by her children, though they be as opposite as Jesus and John the baptist; Jew and Greek; male and female.

Written language and grammar are the servants of Christ Jesus and his spirit from the Father. They are good, but only servants. The 12 tribes heard the words of the gospel spoken, but it was not blended with faith in their hearts and minds as it was with Abraham.

Jesus was rejected through the power of academic supremacy.

Academic supremacy stifled the Reformation as they relied more and more on the tools of academic, philosophical and scientific reasoning, called faith. Written information is good, but limited. Written information is not faith, even concerning Jesus. The fullness of the truth of God cannot be revealed or vindicated by a dictionary and rules of grammar. All written information is like a serpent on a rod. The vision of Christ must attend its observance to be benefited. God speaks and reveals his son Jesus to us through written and oral witnesses.

Those who believe they are justified through faith without the works of the law should never strive and contend concerning the absolute complete meaning of one piece of written communication. This is the tool of bondage concerning Mt. Sinai.

Let God's testimony be established in the mouth of two or three of his witnesses.

Joe

 

[VictorC]

Joe, I have no idea what you're talking about. Somehow you hinted at a connection between Revelation 14 and the sabbath, and I'm not alone in noting the connection you alleged is nowhere to be found. Would you like to clarify what the intent of your posts are?

Victor,

Wisdom is justified by her children, though they be as opposite as Jesus and John the baptist; Jew and Greek; male and female.

Written language and grammar are the servants of Christ Jesus and his spirit from the Father. They are good, but only servants. The 12 tribes heard the words of the gospel spoken, but it was not blended with faith in their hearts and minds as it was with Abraham.

Jesus was rejected through the power of academic supremacy.

Academic supremacy stifled the Reformation as they relied more and more on the tools of academic, philosophical and scientific reasoning, called faith. Written information is good, but limited. Written information is not faith, even concerning Jesus. The fullness of the truth of God cannot be revealed or vindicated by a dictionary and rules of grammar. All written information is like a serpent on a rod. The vision of Christ must attend its observance to be benefited. God speaks and reveals his son Jesus to us through written and oral witnesses.

Those who believe they are justified through faith without the works of the law should never strive and contend concerning the absolute complete meaning of one piece of written communication. This is the tool of bondage concerning Mt. Sinai.

Let God's testimony be established in the mouth of two or three of his witnesses.

Joe

Joe, you didn't answer my question. If I were to accept the candor of your post as it appears, I would have to conclude your intent is to dismiss the Bible as serpent on a rod. I am concerned futher by your comment "The vision of Christ must attend its observance to be benefited", which suggests your works (undefined) are requisite for your salvation. And, what "vision" of Christ are you referring to?

Your post causes more questions to arise, and none of the questions it was hoped would be answered were addressed.

 

[mrasell]

The problem for me is the nearest synagogue is 50 miles away. That's more than a sabbath's day walk.

Jesus rejected the man made rules of the Pharisees regarding Sabbath keeping, while He always observed God's law. See Matthew 15 / Mark 7 where he asks them why they break God's law to observe their traditions.

By the time of Jesus, strict rabbinical rules had been formulated to regulate Sabbath observance, such as how far one could walk, what objects could be carried and so on. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for breaking God’s law by their traditions (Matthew 15:3, 6; Mark 7:8-9, 13). Rather than protecting God’s laws these rules had become a means of breaking them! According to these man made rules which were later codified in the Mishna, healing on the Sabbath was prohibited except in life threatening cases. Jesus did not accept these rules and healed people on the Sabbath, so the Pharisees accused Him of being a Sabbath breaker. This was no truer than the accusation that He was a glutton and a drunkard (Luke 7:34). The Biblical concept of true Sabbath keeping is found in Isaiah 58 and is associated with helping the oppressed and the poor. After healing a man with a withered hand, Jesus responded to His critics by asking them if one of them had a sheep that fell into a pit, would they not pull it out on the Sabbath (Matthew 12:11)? The rabbinical rules allowed for that, but not for healing a long term illness on the Sabbath. Jesus was challenging them to consider whether one should not have more compassion on a person than an animal!

The Pharisees became angry when they saw Jesus’ disciples picking ears of corn on the Sabbath. Jesus responded by saying that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath (Mark 2:27). He was not endorsing breaking the Sabbath by reaping a whole field or doing common labour that could wait until another time; picking a few ears of corn to satisfy hunger on the Sabbath was not a sin. The controversy between Jesus and the Pharisees was not about whether to keep the Sabbath, rather it revolved around the way it was kept.

 

[ricker]

Jesus rejected the man made rules of the Pharisees regarding Sabbath keeping, while He always observed God's law. See Matthew 15 / Mark 7 where he asks them why they break God's law to observe their traditions.

By the time of Jesus, strict rabbinical rules had been formulated to regulate Sabbath observance, such as how far one could walk, what objects could be carried and so on. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for breaking God’s law by their traditions (Matthew 15:3, 6; Mark 7:8-9, 13). Rather than protecting God’s laws these rules had become a means of breaking them! According to these man made rules which were later codified in the Mishna, healing on the Sabbath was prohibited except in life threatening cases. Jesus did not accept these rules and healed people on the Sabbath, so the Pharisees accused Him of being a Sabbath breaker. This was no truer than the accusation that He was a glutton and a drunkard (Luke 7:34). The Biblical concept of true Sabbath keeping is found in Isaiah 58 and is associated with helping the oppressed and the poor. After healing a man with a withered hand, Jesus responded to His critics by asking them if one of them had a sheep that fell into a pit, would they not pull it out on the Sabbath (Matthew 12:11)? The rabbinical rules allowed for that, but not for healing a long term illness on the Sabbath. Jesus was challenging them to consider whether one should not have more compassion on a person than an animal!

The Pharisees became angry when they saw Jesus’ disciples picking ears of corn on the Sabbath. Jesus responded by saying that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath (Mark 2:27). He was not endorsing breaking the Sabbath by reaping a whole field or doing common labour that could wait until another time; picking a few ears of corn to satisfy hunger on the Sabbath was not a sin. The controversy between Jesus and the Pharisees was not about whether to keep the Sabbath, rather it revolved around the way it was kept.

So I can drive my car to the nearest synagogue. No offence, but I prefer a Christian church.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

By the time of Jesus, strict rabbinical rules had been formulated to regulate Sabbath observance, such as how far one could walk, what objects could be carried and so on.

Are these man-made rules or God-given rules?

What about rules relating to carrying burdens, kindling fires, buying and selling, going through the city gates and pursuing your own pleasure? Were these man-made rules or God-given rules?

BFA

 

[VictorC]

So I can drive my car to the nearest synagogue. No offence, but I prefer a Christian church.

Lighting a fire under the hood and getting inside said automobile (dwell) would be a violation of the sabbath. Riding a bicycle would entail work. I think there's a serious problem with the synagogue solution - Judaism was given the oracles of God in order to teach them (and us) how badly we need a Redeemer. The Christian church sounds like a much better idea to me, too.

 

[VictorC]

Jesus rejected the man made rules of the Pharisees regarding Sabbath keeping, while He always observed God's law. See Matthew 15 / Mark 7 where he asks them why they break God's law to observe their traditions.

By the time of Jesus, strict rabbinical rules had been formulated to regulate Sabbath observance, such as how far one could walk, what objects could be carried and so on. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for breaking God’s law by their traditions (Matthew 15:3, 6; Mark 7:8-9, 13). Rather than protecting God’s laws these rules had become a means of breaking them! According to these man made rules which were later codified in the Mishna, healing on the Sabbath was prohibited except in life threatening cases. Jesus did not accept these rules and healed people on the Sabbath, so the Pharisees accused Him of being a Sabbath breaker. This was no truer than the accusation that He was a glutton and a drunkard (Luke 7:34). The Biblical concept of true Sabbath keeping is found in Isaiah 58 and is associated with helping the oppressed and the poor. After healing a man with a withered hand, Jesus responded to His critics by asking them if one of them had a sheep that fell into a pit, would they not pull it out on the Sabbath (Matthew 12:11)? The rabbinical rules allowed for that, but not for healing a long term illness on the Sabbath. Jesus was challenging them to consider whether one should not have more compassion on a person than an animal!

The Pharisees became angry when they saw Jesus’ disciples picking ears of corn on the Sabbath. Jesus responded by saying that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath (Mark 2:27). He was not endorsing breaking the Sabbath by reaping a whole field or doing common labour that could wait until another time; picking a few ears of corn to satisfy hunger on the Sabbath was not a sin. The controversy between Jesus and the Pharisees was not about whether to keep the Sabbath, rather it revolved around the way it was kept.

Marc, the ordinance mandating sacrificing two lambs and making burnt offerings on the sabbath wasn't a man-made addition to the law. It was spoken to Moses directly by God. Why is that so special, one might ask? Because it becomes more and more evident that you're replacing the sabbath ordained by God with a man-made rendition that isn't compliant with the first covenant law taken away by the Hand of God, for the reason expressed in Hebrews 10:1-9 that He has no pleasure in the burnt offerings "which are offered according to the law" (Hebrews 10:8).

 

[mrasell]

Marc, the ordinance mandating sacrificing two lambs and making burnt offerings on the sabbath wasn't a man-made addition to the law. It was spoken to Moses directly by God. Why is that so special, one might ask? Because it becomes more and more evident that you're replacing the sabbath ordained by God with a man-made rendition that isn't compliant with the first covenant law taken away by the Hand of God, for the reason expressed in Hebrews 10:1-9 that He has no pleasure in the burnt offerings "which are offered according to the law" (Hebrews 10:8).

This requirement was not present in Eden, neither after the Cross nor in the new earth. Even Hebrews says that there were changes to the law in the New Covenant, such as a new sacrifice, temple and priesthood. So there is no need for animal sacrifices on the Sabbath anymore.

 

[mrasell]

This is a great point! The SDA's like to point to Jesus as the example of how one should live in order to be saved, but the problem with this is He was PERFECT. How can perfection really be the expectation? It is ridiculous when you think about it.

Jesus said be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Biblical perfection does not equate to absolute sinlessness, it means living a godly life and keeping God's commandments because we love God and recognised that He has saved us by His grace alone.
1 John 2:3-4; Romans 3:31.

 

[StormyOne]

Jesus said be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Biblical perfection does not equate to absolute sinlessness, it means living a godly life and keeping God's commandments because we love God and recognised that He has saved us by His grace alone.
1 John 2:3-4; Romans 3:31.

nothing like misinterpreting the word "perfect." A better rendering would be "be complete as your father in heaven is complete..."

 

[VictorC]

This requirement was not present in Eden, neither after the Cross nor in the new earth. Even Hebrews says that there were changes to the law in the New Covenant, such as a new sacrifice, temple and priesthood. So there is no need for animal sacrifices on the Sabbath anymore.

This origin in Eden you allude to has never been supported, and even Exodus 31:13 makes a point that the sabbath wasn't applicable to anyone alive in Eden: "Speak also to the children of Israel, saying: `Surely My Sabbaths you shall keep, for it is a sign between Me and you throughout your generations, that you may know that I am the LORD who sanctifies you". Israel was Jacob, and Jacob wasn't alive in Eden, and neither were any of his posterity.

Naturally, there aren't sacrifices past the cross because the law that ordained them was fulfilled, and the shadow meant to lead us to God's "My rest" expired. Your point about Hebrews mentioning changes in the law isn't exactly a complete rendition of what that epistle tells us. The narrative weaves a story that tells us that the law was changed (Hebrews 7:12), annulled (7:18), obsolete (8:13), and taken away by the time we reach Hebrews 10:9. The law wasn't merely "changed in the new covenant", but rather is shown to be completely incompatible with the new covenant: "He takes away the first that He may establish the second" (10:9). That "first" was the covenant ordained at Mount Sinai, which was the ten commandments.

 

[VictorC]

If anyone wants to look at the first book online its available at Adventist Enterprises - Home and two chapters of the second book can be read online there.

An update - as of this morning, the discussion section of pastor Marc Rasell's website has been taken down. He is no longer interested in discussion about the subjects he has written about, as it was apparent his premises were constantly in question and he wasn't providing a defense for them.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

LLOJ subscribes

 

[VictorC]

LLOJ subscribes

You're a little late, my friend.