Where is Christ and what is He doing?

[NightEternal]

"Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God waiting from that time onward until His enemies be made a footstool for His feet." Hebrews 10:11-12

***************************************************************************************************

This text has always posed a problem for me in regards to our belief as a church. How is it to be reconciled with our understanding of Christ's Heavenly ministration? The SDA Bible commentary is vague, at best, in addressing this verse.

First of all, this seems to imply Christ's work of atonement is complete and He is inactive in Heaven until He returns to earth. How can we translate this term 'waiting' you Greek scholars? Is it an idle, stationary state of existence, absent of activity? Or is it a state of anticipation that does not necessarily preclude activity?

Second of all, what do we make of the phrase 'right hand of God'? How is that concept to be understood? I have heard SDA's say that it is referring to the favor of God, deliniating authourity or a high place of honor, not necessarily geographical location. Mainline evangelicals say it is strictly defining geographical location and cannot be interpreted any other way.

My question is, if we do not consider it geographical location, what do we do with the fact that Stephen, in his vision just before he expired, did not see Christ engaged in activity or in some Heavenly ministry, but rather geographically stationary at the right hand of God?

 

[NightEternal]

Hey, come on guys! I need some answers here.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

A lot of problems come from the assumptions that people begin with. First there is the idea that Jesus Christ is somehow seperate from God. Physically this it true of the incarnation but most of the New Testament verses are meant to show that Jesus Christ is God, thus statements like right hand of the Father, the right hand meaning that He is just as much God as the Father, that they are in fact one and the same God, not divisible. This is the import of such statements as I and the Father are one and it is likewise the meaning of the words when He says I can do nothing of myself. His intent is to show that He is complete as God even in earthly body He acts as God. Which is why He even forgave sins, He was trying to show that He was God in human flesh.

Once you realize that Jesus is God the idea of Jesus spending some time in one section of a supposed heavenly sanctuary begins to make little sense. So also we see that God is the Holy Spirit which acts upon the mind of man. That is just as much Jesus because Jesus is God. So when Paul says let the mind of Christ be in you he is referring to the influence of God in each believers mind.

The Hebrews text is written in such a way that it does not cover all the aspects of God when He deals with man but is written in the form of completed human mission of Jesus Christ which results will be success.

we get into a lot of problems if we try to divide God, some trinitarians become more like tri theists and they lose the unity of the One God.

 

[annie1speed]

I have thoughts and Bible verses to go along with them. But I'm not allowed to post here. I'll just lurk and read.

Annie

 

[freeindeed2]

I have thoughts and Bible verses to go along with them. But I'm not allowed to post here. I'll just lurk and read.

Annie

Annie, how could I become as smart as you?

 

[annie1speed]

Awwwww, I don't always keep my mouth shut. Just ask my husband.

 

[Sophia7]

When Jesus ascended to heaven and sat down at the right hand of the Father, the atonement was finished. That's what His sitting signifies. Heaven itself is the true sanctuary, and the throne of God is the heavenly reality that the mercy seat in the Most Holy Place symbolized.

HEB 9:23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's presence. 25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.
​

Just as the OT Day of Atonement was the culmination of the whole year of ceremonies, Jesus' entrance into heaven as our High Priest was the climax and the fulfillment of the whole sacrifical system. Hebrews uses not only Day of Atonement imagery but also imagery from many other sanctuary services. Jesus was the reality that all of it pointed to.

Jesus finished the work of salvation long before 1844. The Bible doesn't support the Adventist view of what happened in 1844 at all (and that view has evolved greatly from the original interpretations of the Adventist pioneers and now even contradicts EGW on some points). Jesus completed the atonement when He presented Himself to the Father. All that was left to wait for was the time when His enemies would be made His footstool:

HEB 10:11 Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. 13 Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, 14 because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

HEB 10:15 The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First he says:

HEB 10:16 "This is the covenant I will make with them
after that time, says the Lord.
I will put my laws in their hearts,
and I will write them on their minds."

HEB 10:17 Then he adds:

"Their sins and lawless acts
I will remember no more."

HEB 10:18 And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin.
​

The final consummation of the Day of Atonement is judgment, but there is no investigative judgment, only the final judgment, which is executive, and we who are in Christ have no fear of condemnation. We can wait with assurance for Him to "appear a second time." Our sins have been forgiven, not transferred to the heavenly sanctuary. Jesus doesn't need an investigative judgment to know who belongs to Him, and He doesn't need an investigative judgment to vindicate His character before the angels and the rest of the universe. He demonstrated all that was necessary long ago when He died on the cross to pay the price for our sins.

 

[Jon0388g]

Our sins have been forgiven, not transferred to the heavenly sanctuary. Jesus doesn't need an investigative judgment to know who belongs to Him, and He doesn't need an investigative judgment to vindicate His character before the angels and the rest of the universe.

It's a shame you've come this far, Sophia.

Jon

 

[tall73]

It's a shame you've come this far, Sophia.

Jon

Texts showing sins being forgiven:


Isa 43:25 "I, I am he who blots out your transgressions for my own sake, and I will not remember your sins.

Isa 44:22 I have blotted out your transgressions like a cloud and your sins like mist; return to me, for I have redeemed you.

Eze 33:16 None of the sins that he has committed shall be remembered against him. He has done what is just and right; he shall surely live.

Mic 7:19 He will again have compassion on us; he will tread our iniquities under foot. You will cast all our sins into the depths of the sea.

Psa 130:3 If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?
Psa 130:4 But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared.

Mat 9:2 And behold, some people brought to him a paralytic, lying on a bed. And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven."

Mat 26:28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

Luk 3:3 And he went into all the region around the Jordan, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.

Luk 7:47 Therefore I tell you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven--for she loved much. But he who is forgiven little, loves little."

Act 3:19 Repent therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out

Act 22:16 And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.'

Rom 4:7 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered

Heb 1:3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,


Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,

1Pe 2:24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.

1Pe 3:18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit

2Co 5:21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

 

[Jon0388g]

Texts showing sins being forgiven:


Isa 43:25 "I, I am he who blots out your transgressions for my own sake, and I will not remember your sins.

Isa 44:22 I have blotted out your transgressions like a cloud and your sins like mist; return to me, for I have redeemed you.

Eze 33:16 None of the sins that he has committed shall be remembered against him. He has done what is just and right; he shall surely live.

Mic 7:19 He will again have compassion on us; he will tread our iniquities under foot. You will cast all our sins into the depths of the sea.

Psa 130:3 If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?
Psa 130:4 But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared.

Mat 9:2 And behold, some people brought to him a paralytic, lying on a bed. And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven."

Mat 26:28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

Luk 3:3 And he went into all the region around the Jordan, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.

Luk 7:47 Therefore I tell you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven--for she loved much. But he who is forgiven little, loves little."

Act 3:19 Repent therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out

Act 22:16 And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.'

Rom 4:7 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered

Heb 1:3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,


Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,

1Pe 2:24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.

1Pe 3:18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit

2Co 5:21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

I'm familiar with those texts.

I assumed she meant our sins, including sins we have not committed/repented of yet, are already forgiven.

If I was wrong, I apologise.


Jon

 

[tall73]

It seems this issue has come up several time.


Christ's death is sufficient for the sin of the whole world. He died for the sins of the whole world.

Think of it this way.

I go to the store with grandpa. Grandpa pays for my sandwich. It is paid. I decide I don't want my sandwich. I lose out on the sandwich.

My acceptance of the sandwich is what determines whethere I get it. But either way the sandwich is paid.

We receive forgiveness through repentance. But the price for that forgiveness is already paid. Sins are paid. The assurance that we have an advocate with the Father is there.

It is a matter of whether we in fact ask for that forgivenes and receive the gift.

Now let's say I reject grandpa's sandwich, then later have to go buy my own. Therefore I wound up having to spend my own money and wasted a generously given sandwich. There was no reason to reject it, I just insisted on paying for my own sandwich.

The sins are paid. We can accept it or we can buy our own sandwich...so to speak.

 

[OntheDL]

When Jesus ascended to heaven and sat down at the right hand of the Father, the atonement was finished. That's what His sitting signifies. Heaven itself is the true sanctuary, and the throne of God is the heavenly reality that the mercy seat in the Most Holy Place symbolized.

HEB 9:23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's presence. 25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.​

​

Just as the OT Day of Atonement was the culmination of the whole year of ceremonies, Jesus' entrance into heaven as our High Priest was the climax and the fulfillment of the whole sacrifical system. Hebrews uses not only Day of Atonement imagery but also imagery from many other sanctuary services. Jesus was the reality that all of it pointed to.

Jesus finished the work of salvation long before 1844. The Bible doesn't support the Adventist view of what happened in 1844 at all (and that view has evolved greatly from the original interpretations of the Adventist pioneers and now even contradicts EGW on some points). Jesus completed the atonement when He presented Himself to the Father. All that was left to wait for was the time when His enemies would be made His footstool:

HEB 10:11 Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. 13 Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, 14 because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.​

HEB 10:15 The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First he says:​

HEB 10:16 "This is the covenant I will make with them​

after that time, says the Lord.​

I will put my laws in their hearts,​

and I will write them on their minds."​

HEB 10:17 Then he adds:​

"Their sins and lawless acts​

I will remember no more."​

HEB 10:18 And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin.​

​

The final consummation of the Day of Atonement is judgment, but there is no investigative judgment, only the final judgment, which is executive, and we who are in Christ have no fear of condemnation. We can wait with assurance for Him to "appear a second time." Our sins have been forgiven, not transferred to the heavenly sanctuary. Jesus doesn't need an investigative judgment to know who belongs to Him, and He doesn't need an investigative judgment to vindicate His character before the angels and the rest of the universe. He demonstrated all that was necessary long ago when He died on the cross to pay the price for our sins.

There are whole alot more scriptural texts, the whole typical Levitical system for that matter that state contrary to the above interpretations.

To take only one side of the story and not allowing the scriptures to reconscile themselves, is to cater the bible to our own liking. The bible as a whole paints the complete picture.

 

[Sophia7]

There are whole alot more scriptural texts, the whole typical Levitical system for that matter that state contrary to the above interpretations.

To take only one side of the story and not allowing the scriptures to reconscile themselves, is to cater the bible to our own liking. The bible as a whole paints the complete picture.

I see the whole of Scripture as reconciling itself just fine. It is the Adventist sanctuary doctrine that takes verses out of context and reinterprets the Bible to fit preconceived ideas. Contrary to your statement, as discussed in the other thread in Denomination-specific Theology, I believe that the book of Leviticus contradicts your interpretations. However, please feel free to cite specific examples from the Bible to support your assertions. I would be especially interested in any text stating that sins are transferred to the sanctuary by blood. Even traditional Adventist scholars admit that there is no such text.

 

[OntheDL]

I see the whole of Scripture as reconciling itself just fine. It is the Adventist sanctuary doctrine that takes verses out of context and reinterprets the Bible to fit preconceived ideas. Contrary to your statement, as discussed in the other thread in Denomination-specific Theology, I believe that the book of Leviticus contradicts your interpretations. However, please feel free to cite specific examples from the Bible to support your assertions.

There had been enough texts sited for you in other threads. Don't say you haven't seen them.

But I like to know what typical events in the Levitical calendar you think pointed to Jesus' resurrection and ascension?

I would be especially interested in any text stating that sins are transferred to the sanctuary by blood. Even traditional Adventist scholars admit that there is no such text.

It sounds like TSDAs insist there is text about the transfer. Maybe you dont recall that since the very first discussion, I've told you and Tall, there is no actual text on the transfer. But I'd also like to ask for a text that says our sins are transfered to the sacrificial lamb. You can't find it but it didn't stop you from believing it. It seems to me that's picking and choosing.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

It sounds like TSDAs insist there is text about the transfer. Maybe you dont recall that since the very first discussion, I've told you and Tall, there is no actual text on the transfer. But I'd also like to ask for a text that says our sins are transferred to the sacrificial lamb. You can't find it but it didn't stop you from believing it. It seems to me that's picking and choosing.

But maybe it should stop people from believing it. Is there really any reason for sins to be transferred anywhere. Is sin something that can be moved from here to there or from then to now. Whether it is sin transferred to a animal about to be eaten and a small portion of fat burned or whether it is the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ. Why should sin ever be actually transferred. Sin is past actions and attitudes most of which are past, only memories, what good it is to transfer them?

Sacrifices were not about transferring sin but about offering of the people things important to them as a way of acknowledging their desire to be reconciled to God, acknowledge their sin and commune with God. No doubt there was a good amount of the pagan idea of appeasing God in their understanding because the sacrificial system was so similar to all the other pagan religions of sacrifices but with the advent of Christ in the New Testament writings we see it was not about appeasing God, not about sin transfer but about forgiveness. Christ bore the hatred of a sinful world and freely forgave them. The sacrifice was the method of showing the powerful love of God, His ability to forgive and His power to save even from the grave. A life death and resurrection designed to speak to our hatred of God and call us back, to reconcile us to God.

We need to interpret the Old things in the light of Jesus Christ, rather then interpret Jesus Christ in the shadows of ceremonies. This is why Paul gloried in the gospel of the cross. Because the cross and the resurrection is the capstone of Christianity it defines it and it defines what precedes it.

 

[Sophia7]

There had been enough texts sited for you in other threads. Don't say you haven't seen them.

Of course I have seen your posts there, but I disagree that they support your interpretations.

But I like to know what typical events in the Levitical calendar you think pointed to Jesus' resurrection and ascension?

It sounds like TSDAs insist there is text about the transfer. Maybe you dont recall that since the very first discussion, I've told you and Tall, there is no actual text on the transfer. But I'd also like to ask for a text that says our sins are transfered to the sacrificial lamb. You can't find it but it didn't stop you from believing it. It seems to me that's picking and choosing.

But maybe it should stop people from believing it. Is there really any reason for sins to be transferred anywhere. Is sin something that can be moved from here to there or from then to now. Whether it is sin transferred to a animal about to be eaten and a small portion of fat burned or whether it is the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ. Why should sin ever be actually transferred. Sin is past actions and attitudes most of which are past, only memories, what good it is to transfer them?

Sacrifices were not about transferring sin but about offering of the people things important to them as a way of acknowledging their desire to be reconciled to God, acknowledge their sin and commune with God. No doubt there was a good amount of the pagan idea of appeasing God in their understanding because the sacrificial system was so similar to all the other pagan religions of sacrifices but with the advent of Christ in the New Testament writings we see it was not about appeasing God, not about sin transfer but about forgiveness. Christ bore the hatred of a sinful world and freely forgave them. The sacrifice was the method of showing the powerful love of God, His ability to forgive and His power to save even from the grave. A life death and resurrection designed to speak to our hatred of God and call us back, to reconcile us to God.

We need to interpret the Old things in the light of Jesus Christ, rather then interpret Jesus Christ in the shadows of ceremonies. This is why Paul gloried in the gospel of the cross. Because the cross and the resurrection is the capstone of Christianity it defines it and it defines what precedes it.

I do agree with RC on one thing regarding this, which is that we should interpret the ceremonies in the light of the NT revelation of Christ and not treat the OT symbols as if they were the realities.

I believe that the book of Hebrews says that through His death, resurrection, and ascension, Jesus completed the atonement. When He sat down at the right hand of the Father in heaven, He had already fulfilled all of the OT types regarding the sacrifices and the ministration of the blood in the HP and MHP by His one sacrifice.

Also, I believe that sins were forgiven immediately in the daily service. No, there was no literal transfer of sins from a person to an animal. These were all symbols representing atonement for sin. Lev. 4 says over and over that by administering the sacrifices, the priest was making atonement for sin and that the person (or the community) was forgiven. That is clearly stated in the Bible, but there is no biblical support for the idea that sin was not really forgiven but only transferred to the sanctuary until the Day of Atonement.

 

[NightEternal]

Chewing on all of this information as we speak...

My understanding is based on how Questions On Doctrine outlines it: That the atonement has been completed at the cross. Christ's Heavenly ministry only applies the merits of that atonement which has been secured. I agree with Clifford Goldstein and his lesson quarterly on this issue.

As for 1844, I believe that is when the pre-Advent judgment process began for the benefit of the onlooking angels and other Heavenly beings, showing that Christ's people are safe to save, are vindicated and declared innocent, branches snatched from the fire. It's to show that Satan has no case and he has no grounds on which to accuse us.

Thus, I reject an 'investigative' judgment and accept a 'pre-Advent' judgment. I categorically reject any process which determines our 'worthiness' for Heaven. We are worthy because Christ is worthy and His righteousness is imputed to us.

I agree with Sophia that God does not need any 'investigation' to determine who are His, He already knows.

On a final note, I do not believe 1844 or a pre-Advent judgment can be supported Scripturally. I accept them entirely on the basis of the fact that our pioneers seemed to see some significance for them. EGW also seems to have received special light on them. This is also the position some of our own scholars take on the matter in order to protect thier credibility as Bible exegetes.

You would be hard pressed to convince me that if one were to take an individual who was Biblically illiterate, isolate them in a room with only a Bible to read and nothing else, they would somehow miraculously come up with the date of 1844 and the pre-Advent judgment.

Doug Batchelor claims he did this very thing in his cave. He must be one special case then, able to compute and execute the theological, historical, chronological and eschatological gymnastics necessary to end up with 1844 in a single bound.

I do find it problematic that the Bible is supposed to be clear and easy enough for the most uneducated to grasp, and yet it appears to me this important information can only be attained by a specific group through special revelation from God that does not seem available to all. How is this fair on God's part? Are the Bible scholars from other denominations simply retarded that they can't come up with this stuff through thier own studies?

Whether 1844 was the date Christ began the judgment phase of His Heavenly ministry or it was the date when the Advent movement began its proclamation of the three angel's message as Ford contends, doesn't really matter to me. I could be entirely wrong in thinking these two doctrines are actually valid. I have no problems admitting that. It is not a salvation issue for me. I believe it was a significant date for sure however.

Wasn't 1844 also the date Darwin published his Origins Of The Species? I believe it was also the date when Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto. But don't hold me to that.

I do know many significant things took place that year.

I am just having a hard time accepting that Christ is just sitting stationary up there, twiddling His thumbs patiently until His return. I believe SOMETHING has to be taking place up there. When Christ said He was 'going there to prepare a place for us', does that not suggest some sort of work on our behalf, for our benefit? Hmmmm....

Carry on...

 

[Jon0388g]

Also, I believe that sins were forgiven immediately in the daily service. No, there was no literal transfer of sins from a person to an animal. These were all symbols representing atonement for sin. Lev. 4 says over and over that by administering the sacrifices, the priest was making atonement for sin and that the person (or the community) was forgiven. That is clearly stated in the Bible, but there is no biblical support for the idea that sin was not really forgiven but only transferred to the sanctuary until the Day of Atonement.

I do not know where you are getting this from. Sometimes I wonder why you disagree with certain things when you post comments like this that show your misunderstanding.

When have I, DL, or Jim in the other thread posted that sins were not forgiven at the instant of sacrifice? Please find a quote.

The sinner is forgiven for the sin which he has commited. The sin is still on record.


Jon

 

[Sophia7]

I do not know where you are getting this from. Sometimes I wonder why you disagree with certain things when you post comments like this that show your misunderstanding.

When have I, DL, or Jim in the other thread posted that sins were not forgiven at the instant of sacrifice? Please find a quote.

The sinner is forgiven for the sin which he has commited. The sin is still on record.

Jon

You have said that the sinner was forgiven but that the sin was not really done away with until the Day of Atonement, only transferred to the sanctuary. I don't see that as real forgiveness because the sin isn't gone; it's still there hanging over people's heads, and, even worse, God has to put up with its pollution in His holy presence. My point, in contrast, is that the atonement was completed at the time of the sacrifice. The person was forgiven, and the sin was atoned for and gone. It wasn't waiting around defiling the sanctuary for the whole rest of the year until Yom Kippur.

Here are a couple of quotes from you:

You stress that blood atones, and I think we are all agreed on this. But, what is atoned? Is it the sin, or the sinner? Lev 4:26 states "....Thus the priest shall make atonement for him in regard to to his sin, and he will be forgiven." I think all verses follow this same drift (I stand under correction). So, it is the sinner who is atone for in regard to the sin committed, the sin itself is not yet "atoned." Does this bare any significance in the fact that "atonement" in its broadest sense is not complete at the sacrifice?

http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=34600283&postcount=49

1. If the sin and the sinner were atoned for at the same instant, what is the purpose of the Day of Atonement?

2. There is no text that says "sin is transferred to the temple by the blood" to my knowledge. Does thie mean that we cannot logically deduce that this was so? WHY did the priest sprinkle the blood into the sanctuary then? You cannot say to make atonement for it, because this was only done at Yom Kippur.

http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=34601407&postcount=52

The Bible says that the blood that was brought into the HP in the daily ministration (which did not include the blood of the individuals' sacrifices) was taken there to make atonement:

LEV 6:30 But any sin offering whose blood is brought into the Tent of Meeting to make atonement in the Holy Place must not be eaten; it must be burned.
​

You have to read into the Bible much more than it says in order to get it to support the idea that confessed sins were transferred to the sanctuary by blood and that the defilement of sin from the sanctuary was removed only on the Day of Atonement. These texts show that the sanctuary was defiled by sin at the time of its commission and also that atonement for the defilement of these particular sins was made immediately by the punishment of the sinner (not to be confused with being forgiven for his sin because his own death couldn't procure that for him), not postponed until the Day of Atonement:

LEV 20:1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Say to the Israelites: `Any Israelite or any alien living in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech must be put to death. The people of the community are to stone him. 3 I will set my face against that man and I will cut him off from his people; for by giving his children to Molech, he has defiled my sanctuary and profaned my holy name.
___________________________________________

NU 19:11 "Whoever touches the dead body of anyone will be unclean for seven days. 12 He must purify himself with the water on the third day and on the seventh day; then he will be clean. But if he does not purify himself on the third and seventh days, he will not be clean. 13 Whoever touches the dead body of anyone and fails to purify himself defiles the LORD's tabernacle. That person must be cut off from Israel. Because the water of cleansing has not been sprinkled on him, he is unclean; his uncleanness remains on him.
___________________________________________

NU 35:31 " `Do not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer, who deserves to die. He must surely be put to death.
NU 35:32 " `Do not accept a ransom for anyone who has fled to a city of refuge and so allow him to go back and live on his own land before the death of the high priest.
NU 35:33 " `Do not pollute the land where you are. Bloodshed pollutes the land, and atonement cannot be made for the land on which blood has been shed, except by the blood of the one who shed it.
NU 35:34 Do not defile the land where you live and where I dwell, for I, the LORD, dwell among the Israelites.'"
​

I guess we've already discussed many of these things in the DST thread, and we're no closer to agreeing on them.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

As for 1844, I believe that is when the pre-Advent judgment process began for the benefit of the onlooking angels and other Heavenly beings, showing that Christ's people are safe to save, are vindicated and declared innocent, branches snatched from the fire. It's to show that Satan has no case and he has no grounds on which to accuse us.

...
I do find it problematic that the Bible is supposed to be clear and easy enough for the most uneducated to grasp, and yet it appears to me this important information can only be attained by a specific group through special revelation from God that does not seem available to all. How is this fair on God's part? Are the Bible scholars from other denominations simply retarded that they can't come up with this stuff through thier own studies?

...
Wasn't 1844 also the date Darwin published his Origins Of The Species? I believe it was also the date when Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto. But don't hold me to that.

What do you find so important about the pre-advent judgment. Unless you are being sarcastic, it does not seem terribly important to any human on earth if God proves to supposedly questioning angels that people are safe to save. From the Bible you get the idea that the holy angels are perfectly faithful to God and not about questioning God's honesty and trustworthiness by saving people. Of course if they question who God saves or not they are just as likely to question God's record keeping, which frankly would be easy to doctor. The intelligent beings with questions about God are right here on this very planet and the pre-advent judgment does nothing for them.

Origin of the species was published in 1859 the manifesto was 1848.
The problem with trying to find something that happened in 1844 is that what ever happened or ended happening had to begin 2300 years earlier, which is why the whole system has fallen apart.