Where is Christ and what is He doing?

[Adventist Dissident]

There aren't 2 loaves, but 12 loaves. The 12 loaves represent 12 tribes of Israel and the Word of God.

if that is the case then you and woob are at odds. and it is not the throne of God.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

Are you saying these two verses suggesting the Father was the Most Holy Place prior to 1844?

yes, it sure looks like it

Guess where the Father is before 1844? In the holy place. The High Priest went into the Holy Place daily before the presence of the Lord.

Exodus 28
29 And Aaron shall bear the names of the children of Israel in the breastplate of judgment upon his heart, when he goeth in unto the holy place, for a memorial before the LORD continually.
30 And thou shalt put in the breastplate of judgment the Urim and the Thummim; and they shall be upon Aaron's heart, when he goeth in before the LORD: and Aaron shall bear the judgment of the children of Israel upon his heart before the LORD continually.

is says that he was at the right hand of the father.

 

[OntheDL]

if that is the case then you and woob are at odds. and it is not the throne of God.

Don't pick and choose. The throne was still in the Holy Place by two verses quoted from Exodus 28.

 

[OntheDL]

is says that he was at the right hand of the father.

So? What are you saying? Ex 28 shows the Lord was in the Holy Place continually/daily prior to the day of judgment. Plain and simple. Just admit the scriptures proved you are wrong and move on.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

So? What are you saying? Ex 28 shows the Lord was in the Holy Place continually/daily prior to the day of judgment. Plain and simple. Just admit the scriptures proved you are wrong and move on.

you assume the judgement started in 1844 and I don't

BTW I thought this would get you to come out

 

[Adventist Dissident]

So? What are you saying? Ex 28 shows the Lord was in the Holy Place continually/daily prior to the day of judgment. Plain and simple. Just admit the scriptures proved you are wrong and move on.

you have not asnwered the original question.

the text says that Jesus was at the right hand of the father, where is that located. the most logical place is in the Throne room? show me something from the NT that proves other wise.

You assume the judgement starts in 1844 and unproven statement

 

[tall73]

Don't pick and choose. The throne was still in the Holy Place by two verses quoted from Exodus 28.

Then would that mean the throne was also in the courtyard, since the altar of sacrifice at the door to the tabernacle was also "before the Lord."

Lev 1:3 If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD.
Lev 1:4 And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.
Lev 1:5 And he shall kill the bullock before the LORD: and the priests, Aaron's sons, shall bring the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.

Or of course the phrase was just speaking of the whole sanctuary service.

 

[tall73]

Actually, I am agreeing with you.

The thing that I think most of us are wrong about is that we often take the 'types' to the extreme by assuming them to have to take place exactly as illustrated, when in fact they were merely meant to illustrate a lesson, to enhance our understanding about the character of God, and the role that He plays in our lives to bring about our salvation.

To assume Jesus' to have been confined to a room for a period of time that extended to 1844, thus being separated from the Father for the duration of that time, while knowing that the Bible makes it very clear that He was and is with the Father, is to deny the truth as it is disclosed in the Bible, and to superimpose meaning on the scriptures that does not concur with the purpose of the 'types'.

Exactly.

Though to be fair, they see both Jesus and the Father in the holy place at that time.

But it misses the fact that Hebrews points out many contrasts with the old types--the new is better! Just as earlier in the book Jesus was better than Moses and better than angels, etc. His ministration is better.

The old High Priest would die and needed to be replaced as we learned in an earlier chapter. But Jesus had an indestructible life. The old High Priest had to be from the tribe of Levi. But Jesus was from Judah, after the order of Melchizedek. He was Priest and King. In the old service the High Priest went through the same cycle every year entering only once per year (limited access), only with blood not his own, only with incense to shield him, and with everything perfect or he would be destroyed. But this High Priest entered not with blood of bulls and goats, and not over and over, but once, for all with his own blood. He did not enter only once and then withdraw quickly to repeat it the next year but SAT DOWN in God’s presence and has made a new way for us to have direct access to God . That was the very thing they did not have in the old system. Only the High Priest had access. But now we can come boldly before the throne of grace through the new and living way opened for us.

The very issue over τα αγια (ta hagia) also misses the contrast. The earthly is spelled out in terms of a two apartment sanctuary. But the limited access of the old sanctuary is not what is pictured in the heavently sanctuary. Instead we see that it is heaven itself:

Heb 9:24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.

Here it emphasizes that Christ entered heaven itself to appear in the presence of God. For those who say that ta hagia ALWAYS means the holy place compartment, if the holy place is heaven itself....what is the most holy in your scheme? There is nothing else to be! Heaven is heaven and it is not divided into two compartments. That was an illustration. But the heavenly reality is not a two apartment building but heaven itself in God's presence. Christ entered there for us to present His sacrifice before the Holy God. We make a mistake when we interpret the fulfillment in light of the type. The book of Hebrews shows over and over again how the type was not the reality. The reality far transcends the type.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

It would really be a stretch to say that the two loaves represent two thrones (particularly for a monotheistic religion). They are an offering of the people to God. These are ways that the Priests received their food.

[SIZE=-0] Leviticus 23:17 [/SIZE] [SIZE=-0] Each family is to bring [SIZE=+1]two loaves[/SIZE] of bread and present them to the LORD as a special gift. Each loaf shall be made of four pounds of flour baked with yeast and shall be presented to the LORD as an offering of the first grain to be harvested.[/SIZE]

 

[OntheDL]

Then would that mean the throne was also in the courtyard, since the altar of sacrifice at the door to the tabernacle was also "before the Lord."

Lev 1:3 If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD.
Lev 1:4 And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.
Lev 1:5 And he shall kill the bullock before the LORD: and the priests, Aaron's sons, shall bring the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.

Or of course the phrase was just speaking of the whole sanctuary service.

It means exactly what it means. "before the LORD", in front of, or in the vicinity of the LORD.

The sinner brings the animal to be tied to the stakes fixed on the ground. This is right next to the entrance to the Holy Place.

And of Adventist doctrines are not based on one isolated text. There are other supporting evidence which had been shown to you in many previous discussions.

 

[tall73]

It means exactly what it means. "before the LORD", in front of, or in the vicinity of the LORD.

The sinner brings the animal to be tied to the stakes fixed on the ground. This is right next to the entrance to the Holy Place.

And of Adventist doctrines are not based on one isolated text. There are other supporting evidence which had been shown to you in many previous discussions.

Sort of like the holy place is right in front of the most holy place where it says the ark is where He meets with them?

The altar of sacrifice is not in the holy place but is in the courtyard, which does not agree with you point previously.

Now please tell me, was Jesus of the tribe of Levi? Using the type to explain the reality doesn't work when the reality often transcends the type.

 

[NightEternal]

Exactly.

Though to be fair, they see both Jesus and the Father in the holy place at that time.

But it misses the fact that Hebrews points out many contrasts with the old types--the new is better! Just as earlier in the book Jesus was better than Moses and better than angels, etc. His ministration is better.

The old High Priest would die and needed to be replaced as we learned in an earlier chapter. But Jesus had an indestructible life. The old High Priest had to be from the tribe of Levi. But Jesus was from Judah, after the order of Melchizedek. He was Priest and King. In the old service the High Priest went through the same cycle every year entering only once per year (limited access), only with blood not his own, only with incense to shield him, and with everything perfect or he would be destroyed. But this High Priest entered not with blood of bulls and goats, and not over and over, but once, for all with his own blood. He did not enter only once and then withdraw quickly to repeat it the next year but SAT DOWN in God’s presence and has made a new way for us to have direct access to God . That was the very thing they did not have in the old system. Only the High Priest had access. But now we can come boldly before the throne of grace through the new and living way opened for us.

The very issue over τα αγια (ta hagia) also misses the contrast. The earthly is spelled out in terms of a two apartment sanctuary. But the limited access of the old sanctuary is not what is pictured in the heavently sanctuary. Instead we see that it is heaven itself:

Heb 9:24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.

Here it emphasizes that Christ entered heaven itself to appear in the presence of God. For those who say that ta hagia ALWAYS means the holy place compartment, if the holy place is heaven itself....what is the most holy in your scheme? There is nothing else to be! Heaven is heaven and it is not divided into two compartments. That was an illustration. But the heavenly reality is not a two apartment building but heaven itself in God's presence. Christ entered there for us to present His sacrifice before the Holy God. We make a mistake when we interpret the fulfillment in light of the type. The book of Hebrews shows over and over again how the type was not the reality. The reality far transcends the type.

Thanks Tall!

Lots to consider here.

So, it seems that there are a vast array of views on this, to say the least. Unfortunately, we are left to fill in a lot of gaps where the Bible does not specify.

Really, what is the point of the hyper-literalism that plagues the Heavenly Sanctuary doctrine? Our credibility in the greater Christian world suffers when we have people in our ranks contending that Christ is quarantined in a literal compartment somewhere.

I liked Roy Adams' book The Sanctuary:

http://www.rhpa.org/products/product.asp?sku=0828006563

He clearly shows the unreasonableness of using a strict one-on-one correspondence between the earthly and the Heavenly.

My favorite parts are where he pokes fun at the idea of a Heavenly bakery that provides fresh shewbread whenever the prior loaf gets stale, as well as his tongue-in-cheek reference to "some building set up in a vacant lot in the corner of Heaven where Christ is obliged to stay confined in a litle room."

Classic.

 

[Jon0388g]

maybe this has already been covered, but when I was reading Acts and the Stoning of Stephen the text was very puzzling for me

Here is what it says,

Act 7:55

But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God
Act 7:56
And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

notice it says Jesus is at the right hand of God, now this does not square with the investigative judgment. Jesus at the father side in the in the 30's and 40's AD. How is this to be explained?

Hello Ice,

This is another issue to do with where the throne of the Father is situated in the Sanctuary. Prior to 1844, there is ample evidence the Father's throne was in the Holy Place, so Jesus was never seperated.

See the Sanctuary thread in Denomination-Specific theology for the texts.

Jon

 

[Jon0388g]

Tall, why do you think that Jesus is said to be "sitting" at the right hand of the Father in heaven, whereas the text from Acts says He was seen "standing" at God's right hand?

 

[OntheDL]

Sort of like the holy place is right in front of the most holy place where it says the ark is where He meets with them?

The case of the high priest wearing the breast plate of judgment is alot more specific. And there are other aspects that point to the throne in the HP.

The altar of sacrifice is not in the holy place but is in the courtyard, which does not agree with you point previously.

Actually the stakes are alot closer to the HP than the altar.

Now please tell me, was Jesus of the tribe of Levi? Using the type to explain the reality doesn't work when the reality often transcends the type.

Better priesthood, better ministry and better covenant... The bible gives reasons why. None of the reasons invalidates the types. If the types are moral lessens that taught the plan of salvation, it then never changes. Did Jesus say He didn't come to destroy the law and prophet?

Concerning the earthly sanctuary, God specifically said it is a pattern of the heavenly. Meaning it's a miniature replica. What more can be said?

 

[sentipente]

It sounds like we no longer believe in omnipresence. We still think of the Creator in purely physical terms. It is no wonder some of us think we can hide from Him. How can we be asking "Where is Jesus?"

 

[tall73]

Tall, why do you think that Jesus is said to be "sitting" at the right hand of the Father in heaven, whereas the text from Acts says He was seen "standing" at God's right hand?

A. The usual picture is sitting.

B. The exception may be a reference to support for Stephen. For instance, Michael stands up at the last days for the saints, etc.

C. Beyond that I don't honestly know.

In any case, the sitting in Hebrews is in reference to the work of the priest who did not sit in the earthly because his round of duties was never over.

The sitting in other contexts often refers to reigning with the Father.

 

[tall73]

The case of the high priest wearing the breast plate of judgment is alot more specific. And there are other aspects that point to the throne in the HP.

More specific than what?

Actually the stakes are alot closer to the HP than the altar.

What direction would you say they are from the altar?

Better priesthood, better ministry and better covenant... The bible gives reasons why. None of the reasons invalidates the types. If the types are moral lessens that taught the plan of salvation, it then never changes. Did Jesus say He didn't come to destroy the law and prophet?

Indeed, then why don't you accept the fulfillment of heaven itself as the new tabernacle?

 

[OntheDL]

More specific than what?

More specific meaning the high priest entered into the holy place daily appearing before the Lord.

What direction would you say they are from the altar?

west

Indeed, then why don't you accept the fulfillment of heaven itself as the new tabernacle?

Do you have more text other than the Hebrews quote?

What will you sugguest next? Throw away the Old Testament?

Because the bible explicitly said it was patterned after the heavenly (would you ever try to make a fake $13 bill?). And Many saw visions of actual heavenly sanctuary scenes: Isaiah, Daniel, John. And lastly unlike you who gets paid to preach and uphold SDA doctrines but do not, I believe the writings of EGW to be the testimony of Jesus.

‘We all need to keep the subject of sanctuary in mind. God forbids the clutter of words coming from human lips should lessen the belief of our people in the truth that there is a sanctuary in heaven. And the pattern of this sanctuary was once built on the earth. God desires His people to become familiar with this pattern keeping ever before their minds where God is all and all.’ ---Letter 233, 1904.

 

[tall73]

double