What are 7th day adventists?

[Sophia7]

What do you mean by "investigative judgement"? I have not heard that brought up yet at all.

This is the official belief statement on it:

24. Christ's Ministry in the Heavenly Sanctuary:
There is a sanctuary in heaven, the true tabernacle which the Lord set up and not man. In it Christ ministers on our behalf, making available to believers the benefits of His atoning sacrifice offered once for all on the cross. He was inaugurated as our great High Priest and began His intercessory ministry at the time of His ascension. In 1844, at the end of the prophetic period of 2300 days, He entered the second and last phase of His atoning ministry. It is a work of investigative judgment which is part of the ultimate disposition of all sin, typified by the cleansing of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. In that typical service the sanctuary was cleansed with the blood of animal sacrifices, but the heavenly things are purified with the perfect sacrifice of the blood of Jesus. The investigative judgment reveals to heavenly intelligences who among the dead are asleep in Christ and therefore, in Him, are deemed worthy to have part in the first resurrection. It also makes manifest who among the living are abiding in Christ, keeping the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, and in Him, therefore, are ready for translation into His everlasting kingdom. This judgment vindicates the justice of God in saving those who believe in Jesus. It declares that those who have remained loyal to God shall receive the kingdom. The completion of this ministry of Christ will mark the close of human probation before the Second Advent. (Heb. 8:1-5; 4:14-16; 9:11-28; 10:19-22; 1:3; 2:16, 17; Dan. 7:9-27; 8:13, 14; 9:24-27; Num. 14:34; Eze. 4:6; Lev. 16; Rev. 14:6, 7; 20:12; 14:12; 22:12.) (Adventist.org: The Official Site of the Seventh-Day Adventist World Church)
​

It is a belief not taught by any other Christian churches. My husband was an Adventist pastor for 10 years, and he resigned three years ago because we could no longer accept this doctrine as biblical.

 

[Sophia7]

It was my views on hell if I recall correctly that they said seemed aligned with Adventist beliefs, and talking to a few Adventists, I think that was correct. I am not saying I believe all their beliefs, as I do not even know all their beliefs, but I can see a few I agree with already.

I still agree with a few Adventist teachings--primarily those that most Christians hold in common. On the topic of hell, I've been studying it for some time, and I haven't reached a definite conclusion yet, but I still agree somewhat with the Adventist view of it.

 

[heritage36]

I definitely agree with you on a few things you said, Quadshotoffaith. I firmly believe also that it seems most or all denominations of Christianity have at least a few things wrong when it comes to Scripture, and it does seem to be a bit of a search to find the one that has the best grasp of things based on Scripture. I do think it is a very good and firm basis for a denomination how much I hear that most Adventists seem to study the Scriptures, and that they do not have the church structure that I am accustomed to, but more of a learning atmosphere. This is just going off what I have heard thus far, but it beats what I am used to in my Catholic then Methodist experience, just sitting in a service for around an hour and maybe getting 10 minutes of Scripture and a sermon on that, which often doesn't even go off the true meaning of the verses spoke of. The Scripture is the one true inspired source we have these days, and we have to make the most of it and know as much as possible.

 

[Sophia7]

Investigative judgment is about Jesus moving from the Holy Place to the Most Holy Place in the Sanctuary. I don't know much about it myself. I know some sites say that it was a cover up for their prophecy of Jesus' visible second coming in 1844. However, As I understand it, that was apart of the Millerites Movement, and the Adventist Church came after it. And all the Adventists I've spoken to acknowledge that the Bible says Nobody knows when Jesus will come back. Although Jesus didn't come, Adventists believe on that day, something happened, and they have Scripture to back it up. Although it is an area of huge interest in to me, my religion teacher has to make sure I understand all the rest of its foundation before he talks about it. He is an incredibly thorough man, if there aren't verses to back it up, I don't think he would blindly believe it. I am usually a huge skeptic when it comes to anything new/unorthodox, so we will see how it goes. It may not be something I will ever accept, but to understand it, I have to study it. I like hearing both sides before I form an opinion.

The verses that Adventists use to support the IJ have been taken out of context. Daniel 8:14 is the key text, but it says nothing about an investigation of the lives of believers. The context is the restoration of the sanctuary after defilement by the little horn. Daniel 7, another key text cited by Adventists as supposedly dealing with the IJ, is about judgment of the little horn, not of the saints, and it is executive judgment, not investigative.

Also, the IJ doctrine contradicts the book of Hebrews, which says that Jesus not only offered Himself as a once-for-all sacrifice but entered heaven itself by means of His own blood and sat down at the right hand of the Father, thus completing his work of purification. The atonement was finished then, long before 1844.

Even if you aren't ready to look at the IJ in depth yet, I would strongly encourage you to read or reread the whole book of Hebrews. Read it several times so that you understand it well and are familiar with the context before you consult commentaries--either Adventist or non-Adventist. Whether you end up agreeing with the IJ or not, Hebrews paints a wonderful picture of what Jesus did to accomplish our salvation.

When you are ready for a more in-depth presentation of some of the problems with the IJ doctrine in regard to the book of Hebrews, I would recommend this site: sanctuarydoctrine.com.

 

[winslow]

Adventism has some quite unique doctrines that were, if not all originated by, were certainly confirmed by Mrs. White's many visions. Again, can you name any teaching Mrs. White had that is not held as absolute truth by Adventists?

There are only two doctrines that are unique to Seventh-day Adventists. All other doctrines are shared by various recognized christian churches.

 

[Aibrean]

Oh there are more than two. It depends how far down the rabbit hole you've gone.

When we die we are supposed to grow until we are the height of adam and eve before the fall (about 12 ft) and then Jesus is supposed to remain the same height (6 ft) as a reminder of his sacrifice.

That is Adventist doctrine.

 

[heritage36]

The verses that Adventists use to support the IJ have been taken out of context. Daniel 8:14 is the key text, but it says nothing about an investigation of the lives of believers. The context is the restoration of the sanctuary after defilement by the little horn. Daniel 7, another key text cited by Adventists as supposedly dealing with the IJ, is about judgment of the little horn, not of the saints, and it is executive judgment, not investigative.

Also, the IJ doctrine contradicts the book of Hebrews, which says that Jesus not only offered Himself as a once-for-all sacrifice but entered heaven itself by means of His own blood and sat down at the right hand of the Father, thus completing his work of purification. The atonement was finished then, long before 1844.

Even if you aren't ready to look at the IJ in depth yet, I would strongly encourage you to read or reread the whole book of Hebrews. Read it several times so that you understand it well and are familiar with the context before you consult commentaries--either Adventist or non-Adventist. Whether you end up agreeing with the IJ or not, Hebrews paints a wonderful picture of what Jesus did to accomplish our salvation.

When you are ready for a more in-depth presentation of some of the problems with the IJ doctrine in regard to the book of Hebrews, I would recommend this site: sanctuarydoctrine.com.

I am quite familiar with Hebrews, as I have read it several times recently working on figuring out who the author of it was. I actually have a thread on here about that which was very productive if anyone is interested I could post the link to it. I do see how the picture that Hebrews paints of Jesus' sacrifice for our salvation relates to this "investigative judgement" theory though. Perhaps you could elaborate?

 

[VictorC]

I definitely agree with you on a few things you said, Quadshotoffaith. I firmly believe also that it seems most or all denominations of Christianity have at least a few things wrong when it comes to Scripture, and it does seem to be a bit of a search to find the one that has the best grasp of things based on Scripture. I do think it is a very good and firm basis for a denomination how much I hear that most Adventists seem to study the Scriptures, and that they do not have the church structure that I am accustomed to, but more of a learning atmosphere.

The Investigative Judgment exists as an apology for 1844, a date rooted in Millerism's prediction of the second advent at that time. After what was known as the Great Disappointment when nothing happened in October 1844, about 2/3 of William Miller's followers left the movement, either to return to their former church assemblies or else abandon Christianity altogether. William Miller himself recanted the model he created when he saw the date fail to materialize the expected event, and would not lend his support to others who were determined to assign the date to another event that could not be verified.

About 1/3 of William Miller's followers refused to let go of the date, and sought to assign another event to apologize for it in an effort to validate the model of prophecy that came up with 1844 in the first place. A pivotal verse used for the model was Daniel 8:14, replacing the 2300 ereb-boqer (evening-morning) "days" with 2300 years. Ellen White attributes Adventism's reliance on that verse in this way:

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}​

Within that 1/3 of William Miller's followers who didn't follow William Miller's example of abandoning the failed model were the roots of the Jehovah's Witnesses and the seventh-day Adventist church, among others.

1844 was first tied to the second advent of Christ. The "Little Flock" led by the Adventist pioneers (including Ellen Harmon, later White when she married James White) held to that belief, but assigned the date to the "Midnight Cry" announcing the soon return of Christ. The first Adventist doctrine was the Shut Door, meaning that the time of man's salvation had past and Christ was about to return to take His bride and destroy the earth's inhabitants. Years later that doctrine (which was endorsed as a divine vision by Ellen's "I saw") was replaced to open the door on salvation once again.

The Investigative Judgment replaced the Shut Door, attributing Christ's entrance into the Most Holy Place of the Heavenly Sanctuary to 1844. Years of polishing their model in an effort to make it harmonize with Scripture has made it increasingly complex, with an initial entrance into the MHP at Christ's initial ascension, followed by His formal entrance into the MHP in 1844 to investigate the status of "the professed people of God", to determine if they were worthy to take part in the first resurrection or translation if they remained alive at the second advent. Ellen White "I saw" prophesied that some of the attendees at the 1856 Bible Conference in Battle Creek, MI would see Christ's return without tasting death, one of Ellen's several failed "visions".

SDA Fundamental Belief #9 recognizes Christ's "perfect atonement" on the cross, but SDA Fundamental Belief #24 contradicts that perfection when it asserts 1844 began a "second and final phase of atonement". Perfection needs no improvement.

In a nutshell, the Investigative Judgment exists solely as an apology for 1844, to support a date with an event that never happened. A cursory reading of Hebrews 9-10 shows Christ's entrance into the MHP of the Heavenly Sanctuary as a completed event in the past tense when this epistle was penned. It does not allow modification to permit Adventism's model of entrance in 1844. The Investigative Judgment does great harm to Biblical Christianity's affirmation of a completed atonement that redeemed our transgressions under the first covenant (Hebrews 9:15) completely with a result never to be added to:

Hebrews 10
11 And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, 13 from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. 14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.​

According to verse 13 above, the next prophetic event Christ is involved in is the second advent itself. Adventism seeks to shoehorn 1844 before this prophetic timetable in order to validate a fictitious event that never happened.

This is just going off what I have heard thus far, but it beats what I am used to in my Catholic then Methodist experience, just sitting in a service for around an hour and maybe getting 10 minutes of Scripture and a sermon on that, which often doesn't even go off the true meaning of the verses spoke of. The Scripture is the one true inspired source we have these days, and we have to make the most of it and know as much as possible.

There are too many churches that have become comfortable, and don't place the emphasis on Bible study that would insulate their members from fads posing as Biblically-based doctrines:

Ephesians 4
11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; 14 that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, 15 but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ— 16 from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.​

It is the nature of groups such as the Jehovah's Witnesses and the seventh-day Adventists to place a greater emphasis on Bible study, as they are motivated to harmonize their doctrines with Scripture. I admire their dedication myself, but I also recognize where their motivation comes from: validating their claim as God's "remnant" that is distinctive apart from Christianity.

 

[VictorC]

When you are ready for a more in-depth presentation of some of the problems with the IJ doctrine in regard to the book of Hebrews, I would recommend this site: sanctuarydoctrine.com.

I will second Sophia7's recommendation to peruse that website.

 

[Sophia7]

Oh there are more than two. It depends how far down the rabbit hole you've gone.

When we die we are supposed to grow until we are the height of adam and eve before the fall (about 12 ft) and then Jesus is supposed to remain the same height (6 ft) as a reminder of his sacrifice.

That is Adventist doctrine.

Was it your mother-in-law who said that Ellen White wrote that? She may be somewhat mistaken in the details. Sometimes Adventists pass around alleged statements from Ellen White that she didn't actually write or that are based on something she wrote but have been changed as they were handed down in Adventist tradition.

This is what Ellen White actually wrote in The Great Controversy regarding growing after the resurrection:

All come forth from their graves the same in stature as when they entered the tomb. Adam, who stands among the risen throng, is of lofty height and majestic form, in stature but little below the Son of God. He presents a marked contrast to the people of later generations; in this one respect is shown the great degeneracy of the race. But all arise with the freshness and vigor of eternal youth. In the beginning, man was created in the likeness of God, not only in character, but in form and feature. Sin defaced and almost obliterated the divine image; but Christ came to restore that which had been lost. He will change our vile bodies and fashion them like unto His glorious body. The mortal, corruptible form, devoid of comeliness, once polluted with sin, becomes perfect, beautiful, and immortal. All blemishes and deformities are left in the grave. Restored to the tree of life in the long-lost Eden, the redeemed will "grow up" (Malachi 4:2) to the full stature of the race in its primeval glory.The last lingering traces of the curse of sin will be removed, and Christ's faithful ones will appear in "the beauty of the Lord our God," in mind and soul and body reflecting the perfect image of their Lord. Oh, wonderful redemption! long talked of, long hoped for, contemplated with eager anticipation, but never fully understood. {GC 644.3}
​

According to that, Jesus is not six feet tall but slightly taller than Adam, and the rest of us will grow up to "the full stature of the race in its primeval glory." I don't see anything about Adam's specific height there. The closest that she came to mentioning a specific height, as far as I can tell, was in this statement from Spiritual Gifts:

After the earth was created, and the beasts upon it, the Father and Son carried out their purpose, which was designed before the fall of Satan, to make man in their own image. They had wrought together in the creation of the earth and every living thing upon it. And now God says to his Son, "Let us make man in our image." As Adam came forth from the hand of his Creator, he was of noble height, and of beautiful symmetry. He was more than twice as tall as men now living upon earth, and was well proportioned. His features were perfect and beautiful. His complexion was neither white, nor sallow, but ruddy, glowing with the rich tint of health. Eve was not quite as tall as Adam. Her head reached a little above his shoulders. She, too, was noble--perfect in symmetry, and very beautiful. {3SG 33.2}

This sinless pair wore no artificial garments. They were clothed with a covering of light and glory, such as the angels wear. While they lived in obedience to God, this circle of light enshrouded them. Although everything God had made was in the perfection of beauty, and there seemed nothing wanting upon the earth which God had created to make Adam and Eve happy, yet he manifested his great love to them by planting a garden especially for them. A portion of their time was to be occupied in the happy employment of dressing the garden, and a portion in receiving the visits of angels, listening to their instruction, and in happy meditation. Their labor was not wearisome, but pleasant and invigorating. This beautiful garden was to be their home, their special residence. {3SG 34.1}
​

That must be where people get the idea from her writings that Adam was 12 feet tall, but she didn't say that specifically, only that he was "more than twice as tall as men now living upon earth."

And here is one more statement, from Patriarchs and Prophets:

Man was to bear God's image, both in outward resemblance and in character. Christ alone is "the express image" (Hebrews 1:3) of the Father; but man was formed in the likeness of God. His nature was in harmony with the will of God. His mind was capable of comprehending divine things. His affections were pure; his appetites and passions were under the control of reason. He was holy and happy in bearing the image of God and in perfect obedience to His will. {PP 45.2}

As man came forth from the hand of his Creator, he was of lofty stature and perfect symmetry. His countenance bore the ruddy tint of health and glowed with the light of life and joy. Adam's height was much greater than that of men who now inhabit the earth. Eve was somewhat less in stature; yet her form was noble, and full of beauty. The sinless pair wore no artificial garments; they were clothed with a covering of light and glory, such as the angels wear. So long as they lived in obedience to God, this robe of light continued to enshroud them. {PP 45.3}
​

Many of those ideas are not in the Bible, but they didn't originate with EGW; she accepted many of the traditional beliefs of her time without biblical support and incorporated them into her writings, including the notion that Adam and Eve were clothed in garments of light. I do not accept the Adventist belief that she was inspired by God to write those things.

One thing that she did specify was the height of Goliath, and the Bible specifies that as well; however, she was incorrect in the conversion of cubits to feet. She wrote that he was 12 feet tall (1SP 370.1), but "six cubits and a span" would actually be around nine feet.

In any case, everything that Ellen White wrote would fit into the category of SDA Fundamental Belief 18, which says:

One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White. As the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested.
​

The doctrine of Ellen White as a messenger of God and as "a continuing and authoritative source of truth" is definitely unique to Seventh-day Adventism.

 

[VictorC]

There are only two doctrines that are unique to Seventh-day Adventists. All other doctrines are shared by various recognized christian churches.

In the past I have gone through the 28 Fundamental Beliefs of the SDA church, and found that 19 of them contain at least a phrase that is dependent on Ellen White's writings alone, and can't be supported by Scripture.

 

[Sophia7]

I am quite familiar with Hebrews, as I have read it several times recently working on figuring out who the author of it was. I actually have a thread on here about that which was very productive if anyone is interested I could post the link to it. I do see how the picture that Hebrews paints of Jesus' sacrifice for our salvation relates to this "investigative judgement" theory though. Perhaps you could elaborate?

This is the traditional Adventist teaching in as much of a nutshell as I can fit it into; it is very complex and difficult to explain briefly. Keep in mind that I am summarizing it, not agreeing with it.
________________________________________________________________

There is a sanctuary in heaven with two "apartments" or rooms, just like the tabernacle on earth: the holy place and the most holy place. When Jesus ascended to heaven after the resurrection, He entered the holy place and transferred the confessed sins of believers there by His own blood. This is how Ellen White describes it:

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. And as the typical cleansing of the earthly was accomplished by the removal of the sins by which it had been polluted, so the actual cleansing of the heavenly is to be accomplished by the removal, or blotting out, of the sins which are there recorded. This necessitates an examination of the books of record to determine who, through repentance of sin and faith in Christ, are entitled to the benefits of his atonement. The cleansing of the sanctuary therefore involves a work of investigative Judgment. This work must be performed prior to the coming of Christ to redeem his people; for when he comes, his reward is with him to give to every man according to his works. [REV. 22:12.] {4SP 266.1}​

In the OT sacrificial system, when a person sinned and brought an animal as a sacrifice for his sin, that sin was first confessed and transferred to the animal, and then the sin was transferred from the animal to the sanctuary via the administration of the animal's shed blood in the holy place. Those sins, recorded in blood, would build up all year long, defiling the sanctuary, until the Day of Atonement. On that day, the high priest would enter the most holy place to cleanse it from all of the sins that had accumulated that year.

Since the earthly tabernacle was a pattern of the heavenly, there is a corresponding "antitypical" fulfillment of all of the OT ceremonies. Jesus fulfilled the sacrificial system and the spring feasts (Passover, Firstfruits, Pentecost) at the time of His death and resurrection, but the fall feasts (Trumpets, Day of Atonement, Feast of Tabernacles) had yet to be fulfilled in the future. After His ascension, Jesus began His priestly work in the holy place of the heavenly sanctuary, where He remained until 1844. Here is Ellen White's description of what He was doing there:

Such was the service performed "unto the example and shadow of heavenly things." And what was done in type in the ministration of the earthly sanctuary is done in reality in the ministration of the heavenly sanctuary. After His ascension our Saviour began His work as our high priest. Says Paul: "Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us." Hebrews 9:24. {GC 420.2}

The ministration of the priest throughout the year in the first apartment of the sanctuary, "within the veil" which formed the door and separated the holy place from the outer court, represents the work of ministration upon which Christ entered at His ascension. It was the work of the priest in the daily ministration to present before God the blood of the sin offering, also the incense which ascended with the prayers of Israel. So did Christ plead His blood before the Father in behalf of sinners, and present before Him also, with the precious fragrance of His own righteousness, the prayers of penitent believers. Such was the work of ministration in the first apartment of the sanctuary in heaven. {GC 420.3}

Thither the faith of Christ's disciples followed Him as He ascended from their sight. Here their hopes centered, "which hope we have," said Paul, "as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil; whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest forever." "Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by His own blood He entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us." Hebrews 6:19, 20; 9:12. {GC 421.1}

For eighteen centuries this work of ministration continued in the first apartment of the sanctuary. The blood of Christ, pleaded in behalf of penitent believers, secured their pardon and acceptance with the Father, yet their sins still remained upon the books of record. As in the typical service there was a work of atonement at the close of the year, so before Christ's work for the redemption of men is completed there is a work of atonement for the removal of sin from the sanctuary. This is the service which began when the 2300 days ended. At that time, as foretold by Daniel the prophet, our High Priest entered the most holy, to perform the last division of His solemn work--to cleanse the sanctuary. {GC 421.2}
​

Notice that the sins were not cleansed yet but still "remained upon the books of record." The door to the most holy place was closed until 1844. (That date is calculated from Daniel 8:14, and the history behind it is very complicated, so I will leave it at that for now.) In 1844, the antitypical end-time Day of Atonement began, and Jesus as our High Priest moved from the heavenly holy place to the most holy place, where He began the work described by Ellen White in the first quote above, examining the record books in heaven and blotting out the confessed sins of professed believers, which had been transferred there via His blood, thus necessitating the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary. That cleansing process continues to this day, having begun with an investigation of the lives of professed believers who had died, to make sure that all of their sins had been confessed so that they could actually be saved when Jesus returns, and then progressing to the professed believers who are currently living. The antitypical Day of Atonement will end when Jesus leaves the heavenly sanctuary to return to earth.
________________________________________________________________

Again, the above is a summary of the traditional Adventist doctrine, as taught by Ellen White. You will find Adventists today who hold to many different variations of it and some who don't even agree with it. I have many problems with the beliefs that I have described above, but in regard to the book of Hebrews, I believe that the Bible presents Jesus' work of cleansing as already completed at His ascension to heaven, signified by His sitting down at the right hand of the Father. One of the key texts is Hebrews 9:24-25. (Verse 24 is quoted by EGW above, as are several other verses from Hebrews, and I'm sure you'll notice also that she assumed, based on tradition, that Paul wrote Hebrews.). I'll quote those verses here, with a bit of surrounding context:

23 Therefore it was necessary for the copies of the things in the heavens to be cleansed with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
24 For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;
25 nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own.
26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.
27 And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,
28 so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.
​

The traditional Adventist teaching is that the context of those verses is not the Day of Atonement, when the high priest entered the most holy place. There's a whole argument about the Greek word used there and whether it means "holy place" or "most holy place" or "holy places." Really, the context is the determining factor, though, and I believe that the context clearly contains Day of Atonement references. What that means is that, according to those verses, Jesus fulfilled not only the sacrificial aspects of the OT ceremonies but also the high priest's Day of Atonement entrance into the most holy place with blood--His own blood, of course, rather than the blood of animals. His cleansing of sins was completed when He sat down at the right hand of the Father, long before 1844: "When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high" (Hebrews 1:3b).

 

[Sophia7]

Thank you, Victor, for explaining the historical background of the teaching.

 

[VictorC]

Thank you, Victor, for explaining the historical background of the teaching.

I like to offer the generic overview before getting buried in the details

 

[Aibrean]

Yes of course, my mother in law I try to ignore it as best I can. If anyone one is going to help her see truth, it will need to come from her immediate family. I can see that clearly. I am hoping my husband will, at some point, talk to her. Of course, I don't know how well she'll react when she finds out he is fully Lutheran. He's talked to a pastor about it (he works at our sister church) and he's pretty much terrified of her.

 

[VictorC]

Yes of course, my mother in law I try to ignore it as best I can. If anyone one is going to help her see truth, it will need to come from her immediate family. I can see that clearly. I am hoping my husband will, at some point, talk to her. Of course, I don't know how well she'll react when she finds out he is fully Lutheran. He's talked to a pastor about it (he works at our sister church) and he's pretty much terrified of her.

If there is a barrier to her yet learning that your husband (her son, right?) is a Lutheran, there may be damage to the lines of communication that are just as problematic as the doctrinal division. Dinner together and answering questions as they come up might be the easiest means of dialogue, without the need to instill pressure when each party isn't comfortable with the topic of doctrinal differences.

Just a random thought.

 

[Aibrean]

I don't mind debating - it's my husband. He doesn't like any confrontation.

 

[Sophia7]

Yes of course, my mother in law I try to ignore it as best I can. If anyone one is going to help her see truth, it will need to come from her immediate family. I can see that clearly. I am hoping my husband will, at some point, talk to her. Of course, I don't know how well she'll react when she finds out he is fully Lutheran. He's talked to a pastor about it (he works at our sister church) and he's pretty much terrified of her.

That's a tough situation to be in. I hope that at some point your husband finds the courage to talk to her about it. I know it's hard, though. My MIL doesn't go to any church, but she still considers herself an Adventist although she doesn't follow any of the Adventist teachings. She won't talk to us about our reasons for leaving very often because she says that it upsets her too much. Hubby's grandma does talk to us sometimes, usually about the Sabbath, but she still can't understand why we no longer agree with it.

 

[Aibrean]

We talked about it over dinner today and I mentioned what Victor implied - that she may be more hurt that he hid it from her for so long. He said that perhaps it is time to tell her.

 

[VictorC]

We talked about it over dinner today and I mentioned what Victor implied - that she may be more hurt that he hid it from her for so long. He said that perhaps it is time to tell her.

Take your MIL out to Pizza Hut for a great little dinner, and just let the conversation find its own way rather than forcing an agenda.