What I Would Like to See

[cesty]

What I would like to see is someone who is in a prominent position in your church step up to the plate and enter into a discussion with a qualified theologian on the subject of 1844 as it concerns the sanctuary message. I have yet to see anyone do this.

If theologians in your church are willing to write books on this subject, why not sit down with a real person who has hard questions to ask?

I believe you people have a genuine love for God, and I commend your desire to be so committed to holding up the Bible; but there are some serious concerns that need to be addressed with the sanctuary message, which I have yet to find an adequate response to.

 

[JohnMarsten]

What I would like to see is someone who is in a prominent position in your church step up to the plate and enter into a discussion with a qualified theologian on the subject of 1844 as it concerns the sanctuary message. I have yet to see anyone do this.

If theologians in your church are willing to write books on this subject, why not sit down with a real person who has hard questions to ask?

I believe you people have a genuine love for God, and I commend your desire to be so committed to holding up the Bible; but there are some serious concerns that need to be addressed with the sanctuary message, which I have yet to find an adequate response to.

good one!!! you will never see that, its more believe it or leave it stuff...

 

[Stryder06]

What I would like to see is someone who is in a prominent position in your church step up to the plate and enter into a discussion with a qualified theologian on the subject of 1844 as it concerns the sanctuary message. I have yet to see anyone do this.

If theologians in your church are willing to write books on this subject, why not sit down with a real person who has hard questions to ask?

I believe you people have a genuine love for God, and I commend your desire to be so committed to holding up the Bible; but there are some serious concerns that need to be addressed with the sanctuary message, which I have yet to find an adequate response to.

Exactly what questions can't be answered if the books are read, and the seminars are seen? What "hard" questions will be asked that haven't already been answered?

 

[cesty]

Exactly what questions can't be answered if the books are read, and the seminars are seen? What "hard" questions will be asked that haven't already been answered?

OK, if Jesus didn't enter the Most Holy Place until 1844, and the Most Holy Place is where the Father is, then where was Jesus prior to 1844?

 

[Stryder06]

OK, if Jesus didn't enter the Most Holy Place until 1844, and the Most Holy Place is where the Father is, then where was Jesus prior to 1844?

One of the things I've been learning while studying the sanctuary is that the model on earth, along with its services, was not an exact replica of the heavenly reality.

The Father isn't "locked down" to a single location. Before 1844 Jesus was in the Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary.

 

[ChrisCarol]

One of the things I've been learning while studying the sanctuary is that the model on earth, along with its services, was not an exact replica of the heavenly reality.

The Father isn't "locked down" to a single location. Before 1844 Jesus was in the Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary.

Where did you learn those things from?????

 

[cesty]

One of the things I've been learning while studying the sanctuary is that the model on earth, along with its services, was not an exact replica of the heavenly reality.

The Father isn't "locked down" to a single location. Before 1844 Jesus was in the Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary.

I realize God is omnipresent. However, the Bible makes it clear that Jesus entered the Most Holy Place prior to 1844: "Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption." (Hebrews 9:12 NKJV)

If Jesus already entered the Most Holy Place "once and for all" prior to 1844, then why would He have to enter it a second time in 1844?

 

[Stryder06]

Where did you learn those things from?????

Scripture

 

[Stryder06]

I realize God is omnipresent. However, the Bible makes it clear that Jesus entered the Most Holy Place prior to 1844: "Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption." (Hebrews 9:12 NKJV)

If Jesus already entered the Most Holy Place "once and for all" prior to 1844, then why would He have to enter it a second time in 1844?

The text in the book of Hebrews isn't referring to a compartment, but to the sanctuary as a whole. The NKJV translation is incorrect. The proper translation states that Christ entered into the holy place. Not the most Holy Place.

I think the biggest issue here is a misunderstanding of sanctuary and how it relates to Christ's work.

 

[Contented]

OK, if Jesus didn't enter the Most Holy Place until 1844, and the Most Holy Place is where the Father is, then where was Jesus prior to 1844?

There is no biblical basis for the Sanctuary Message. This came about as a result of a failed prophecy. Matthew 24:36 states no one not even the angels of heaven knows when Christ would return. I am sure that scripture was in the same bible that the early Adventists had including E.G. White. It is time for us to focus on Jesus, we know three things about him.

(i) He was born
(ii) He was resurrected
(iii) He will return as King of Kings and Lord of Lord

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

There is no biblical basis for the Sanctuary Message. This came about as a result of a failed prophecy. Matthew 24:36 states no one not even the angels of heaven knows when Christ would return. I am sure that scripture was in the same bible that the early Adventists had including E.G. White. It is time for us to focus on Jesus, we know three things about him.

(i) He was born
(ii) He was resurrected
(iii) He will return as King of Kings and Lord of Lord

So rightly understanding the 2300 day prophesy isn't important?

 

[ChrisCarol]

Originally Posted by ChrisCarol

Where did you learn those things from?????
​

Scripture

Patiently waiting for the specific scripture. Thank you.

 

[Pythons]

Exactly what questions can't be answered if the books are read, and the seminars are seen? What "hard" questions will be asked that haven't already been answered?

How the Passover celebrated in 31 A.D. coincided with a Gregorian Wed ( death of Christ ), Thursday and Friday...
...That is the primary question & given it's the fundamental peg holding the prophetic schema together.

 

[cesty]

The text in the book of Hebrews isn't referring to a compartment, but to the sanctuary as a whole. The NKJV translation is incorrect. The proper translation states that Christ entered into the holy place. Not the most Holy Place.

While the NKJV certainly has its share of translational issues, so also does the KJV. Let's not forget about that misplaced comma in Luke 23:43, and the reference to "Easter" in Acts 12:4 rather than the more accurate word: "Passover." Of course, there are other matters too, but these two should be enough to show that you can't necessarily use the idea that it is a faulty translation of the passage to prove that it isn't referring to the Most Holy Place, unless the context clearly suggests it. But the context appears to suggest that it was the Most Holy Place, and that's likely why the NKJV was translated to reflect that:

"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; not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another—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." (Hebrews 9:24-26 NKJV)

In the OT, the Most Holy Place was where the presence of God was (relative to the sanctuary). See Exodus 25:22 and Leviticus 16:2. Therefore, when the writer of Hebrews speaks of Jesus appearing "in the presence of God for us," he seems to imply that He entered the Most Holy Place. This is likely why he also said, "Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need" (Hebrews 4:16 NKJV). The usage of the word "mercy" within this context seems to be connected to the idea of the "mercy seat," which was located in the Most Holy Place of the sanctuary.

Having said that, we can now go boldly to the throne of grace because Jesus, through the shedding of His own blood and death, opened the way to it. This was illustrated when the veil was rent, as recorded in Mark 15:38. If Jesus only entered the Holy Place, then why was the veil to the Most Holy Place rent?

 

[Contented]

So rightly understanding the 2300 day prophesy isn't important?

Understanding every prophecy is not the most important thing.

I consider what is important as the Apostle John said in
Revelation !:

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

These are things which we must do concerning this prophecy.

(i) Read
(ii) Hear
(iii) Keep

Jesus promised that he who would overcome would inherit all things, and Jesus would be his God, and he could be Jesus' son (21:7). In the end the saints who endure, overcome false doctrine, evil works, the beast, Satan, and any other foe, inherit the kingdom of God prepared for them.

What would it matter if one understood the 2000 days and yet worshipped the beast. The Key is to read and keep what is true, understanding every detail of prophesy is not what we have been called to do.

The Prophet Amos said eloquently, The secret things belong to God, but things he wants man to know he has revealed. I feel is insane to place a lot of emphasis on speculation.

 

[cesty]

There have been. One of them is Dale Razlaff and you can see a statement here: Seventh-Day Adventists: valueachild@msn.com, dale ratzlaff, desmond ford.

I am aware of these individuals and their teachings. They are misguided on several matters, which I don't care to discuss here, because it's not relevant to the subject of this thread.

 

[cesty]

Understanding every prophecy is not the most important thing.

I consider what is important as the Apostle John said in
Revelation !:

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

These are things which we must do concerning this prophecy.

(i) Read
(ii) Hear
(iii) Keep

Jesus promised that he who would overcome would inherit all things, and Jesus would be his God, and he could be Jesus' son (21:7). In the end the saints who endure, overcome false doctrine, evil works, the beast, Satan, and any other foe, inherit the kingdom of God prepared for them.

What would it matter if one understood the 2000 days and yet worshipped the beast. The Key is to read and keep what is true, understanding every detail of prophesy is not what we have been called to do.

The Prophet Amos said eloquently, The secret things belong to God, but things he wants man to know he has revealed. I feel is insane to place a lot of emphasis on speculation.

If latter day prophecy weren't critical to our understanding, then there would have been no point in John saying, "Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is near" (Revelation 1:3 NKJV).

The idea of being blessed for understanding these things is suggestive of being on the right path. This implies that those who lack understanding into these matters are in danger of walking the broad way which leads to destruction, as spoken of by Jesus in Matthew 7:13-14. Keep in mind that Jesus warned us to beware of false prophets (see Matt. 7:15).

But let's not get sidetracked from the purpose of this thread.

 

[ChrisCarol]

Scripture

I am aware of these individuals and their teachings. They are misguided on several matters, which I don't care to discuss here, because it's not relevant to the subject of this thread.

Would you care to tell me just exacetly the subject is.

First post: What I would like to see is someone who is in a prominent position in your church step up to the plate and enter into a discussion with a qualified theologian on the subject of 1844 as it concerns the sanctuary message. I have yet to see anyone do this.

5th post: OK, if Jesus didn't enter the Most Holy Place until 1844, and the Most Holy Place is where the Father is, then where was Jesus prior to 1844?

Are you not wanting questions answered about the Investigative Judgement? I gave you such.

There will be no one who will tell you what it really is because it is not from the Bible just like Dale Ratzlaff was told.

I have always been told there are no stupid questions. But with SDA there are certainly questions which will be skirted away from and unanswered or dodged or twisted. This is one of such.

 

[cesty]

Would you care to tell me just exacetly the subject is.

First post: What I would like to see is someone who is in a prominent position in your church step up to the plate and enter into a discussion with a qualified theologian on the subject of 1844 as it concerns the sanctuary message. I have yet to see anyone do this.

5th post: OK, if Jesus didn't enter the Most Holy Place until 1844, and the Most Holy Place is where the Father is, then where was Jesus prior to 1844?

Are you not wanting questions answered about the Investigative Judgement? I gave you such.

There will be no one who will tell you what it really is because it is not from the Bible just like Dale Ratzlaff was told.

I have always been told there are no stupid questions. But with SDA there are certainly questions which will be skirted away from and unanswered or dodged or twisted. This is one of such.

I probably would have been better off just asking questions. Anyway, what I would like to see happen is for someone to prove (from the Bible only) that Jesus didn't enter the Most Holy Place prior to 1844. From what I see, there is more evidence in the Bible to suggest that He did enter the Most Holy Place prior to 1844 than there is evidence to suggest that He didn't.

 

[Stryder06]

Originally Posted by ChrisCarol

Where did you learn those things from?????
​

Patiently waiting for the specific scripture. Thank you.

Ex 25:9,40
Heb 9:24
Daniel 7:13
Eze 1