| Author | Message | ||
| Denisegilmore |
Okay, I'm back with an update on my recent studies with sdas. This is what was handed me in it's full context. I will not add to nor subtract from what is written on their typed out sheets. I want it added that any reference I tried to make to other Scriptures were almost refused and that when I would try to say something I was told to hurry. Also, I suppose the look I gave, which was one of unbelief at their being so put out with what I had to say, had them quickly add "by hurry I mean hurry and tell us cause were very interested in what you have to say." I said "very quick and not so honest come back but I'm a truth speaker and have to say what I just witnessed" This tendency to not want to listen to other Scriptures on their part and also their anger that I would not just sit there with my mouth shut, has me posting in it's entirety the paperwork given me today. At the end of this rather lengthy posting of their belief, I will comment further. So here goes... Some have gone out of the Adventist Church over the book of Hebrews. Where did they go off? One answer: Albion F. Ballenger over Hebrews 6:19, He saw this as the veil into the Most Holy Place and the purpose of Christ to be starting the Day of Atonement. With this view, what's left for 1844? Nothing. Is it provable that Hebrews 6:19 is referring to the Most Holy Place of the sanctuary? (Or could this be the sanctuary as a whole?) The belief that it's the MHP is based on 4 assumptions: 1} That the term tou katapetasmatos (veil) is the second veil of the tabernacle, separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place. 2} That esoteron-"the (place) within" refers to the inner shrine or Most Holy Place. 3} That God the Father's presence within the OT sanctuary was to be found only in the Most Holy Place. 4} That ta hagia (literally, "the holies") in chapter 9 refers to the Most Holy Place. In other words, it is assumed that the language and imagery of Hebrews reflects the second-apartment and the Day-of-Atonement ritual, although the word "ta hagia" does not really mean "the Most Holy Place", but rather, "the holies" or "the sanctuary". Some points to consider: 1} The contexts of Leviticus 16:2 and Hebrews 6:13-20 are different. Leviticus 16 deals with the Day of Atonement; Hebrews 6:13-20 deals with god's covenant promises and blessings to Abraham and his heirs. So to identify the veil in 6:19, do we impose the context of the Day of Atonement on this passage? (-which is what Ballanger did). Or do we let it stand in its own context? 2}Because the wilderness tabernacle forms the basis for the sanctuary discussion in Hebrews the words used for veil in the Septuigent [LXX]--the Greek version of the Old Testament which was used by Paul in Hebrews--can be compared. The words are katapetasma and kalumma (and episparon). Courtyard veil: katapetasma is used 5 times and kalumma 1. First veil: katapetasma is used 6 times, kalumma katapetasma 1, katakalumma 2, kalumma 1, and epispastron 1. Inner veil: katapetasma 23, katakahumma tou katapetasmatos 1, katakalumma 1. Out of 42 references in the LXX to the 3 veils of the wilderness sanctuary, katapetasma is used 34 times--only 8 when it wasn't! It can be seen that katapetasma is the favorite word for all three veils. This accounts for the numerical adjective being used in Hebrews 9:3. Nothing in the context of Heb. 6 directly identifies which veil is being spoken of. 3} The context of Heb. 6:19 prohibits the meaning of esoteron being other than simply "within" because Katapetasma cannot be identified as the second veil as it can be in Lev. 16:2 and Heb. 9:3. 4} Evidences that the Father is not always in the Most Holy Place in O.T. sanctuary: a} Isaiah 6:1-4 Isaiah was not the High Priest yet he saw the God of Israel on a throne, high and lifted up (suggesting a movable throne?) b} Ezekiel, in vision, saw God upon His movable throne Ezekiel 1:26-28; 11:22,23; 43:2-6 c} Daniel wrote, "I watched until the thrones were put in place and the Ancient of Days was seated." The logical inference is that this represented a change. "The court was seated and the books were opened." Daniel 7:9,10 5} Evidence that the Father is not always in the Most Holy Place in the Heavenly Sancuary in N.T. times: a} Revelation 4:5 "Before the throne were seven lamps of fire". In the earthly tabernacle the table of show-bread (sometimes translated, "the bread of the Presence" Moffatt and NEB for example) was opposite the candlestick. See Exodus 40:22-24. b} In another vision John saw the temple in heaven open with a view of the ark of the covenant which in the earthly sanctuary was in the most holy place. Rev. 11:16-18 As the context indicates, this was a change connected with the "time of the dead, that they should be judged." The N.T. emphasis is on the intercessory ministry of Jesus (holy place) with the judgment in the future. For example: Intercession: 1 John 1:9; 2:12, Hebrews 4:14-16; 8:1-6; 1 Timothy 2:5, Romans 8:34, Acts 5:31, Rev. 1:12,13, Hebrews 7:25 Judgement as future: Acts 24:25; Hebrews 9:27; 10:27, 2 Peter 2:4,9; 3:7, Jude 6, Hebrews 10:25,30. End of their paperwork for this study. After I tried to research this I found that my mind is not at work in the past two days so I would greatly appreciate any and all input including Greek, Hebrew and the Septuigent if it is used. To me this is a salvific issue if one does not believe that complete atonement has been made. Also, along with this comes the end which has satan as our scapegoat. That again is very much, in my mind anyway, a Salvific issue if we do not understand these teachings that are going out into all the world. God Bless any and all for your help, Denise | ||
| Denisegilmore |
One more thing, I am not full of hatred or animosity however it seems that if I cannot get a study where the Word of God is held up or where only one party speaks then I must get answers elsewhere. Here I am. I fully intend to have another study next week but I have given them notice that I will not remain silent and that I feel if we are all seeking truth as proclaimed not only by myself but by them as well, then all Scripture should be examined. Not just a suited few to fit the doctrine as I'm seeing. I am seeking the Truth and if that is from mormons, sdas, nazarenes, lutherans etc then it doesn't matter as long as it is TRUTH. My mind is open and I don't have a claim on any denominational name. So, whenever I have a study I expect to be listened to as well. Realizing that I'm very limited in Biblical understanding and knowledge I listen but also point to Scriptures that led me in another direction or a Scripture that I may have a question about. I do NOT tolerate oppression. Do I sound angry? Yes, I'm angry if people claim to have Truth and are willing to have Bible studies but are unwilling to hear someone else point out a different Scripture than one of their pre-set texts to prove their doctrine. But I am not hateful, just honest and human. I also do not tolerate condenscending tones or statements. This behavior is not what I would consider Christian,,,but then, what do I know? God Bless all and thanks for letting me rant. Denise | ||
| Denisegilmore |
And another thing...sorry guys but I need to know. In the process of this study came the topic of thrones (of course). Since they didn't believe that Jesus went directly to the Father until 1844. I pointed out again that the Bible says He went to the right hand of the Father. They told me that that is a matter of speech meaning He (Jesus) has the same position in Glory as God the Father now. They further explained that Jesus is God, yes, but He is a distinct Person. Well, I asked how many thrones there are if there is one God but two people. They said there is one throne and that God the Father and Jesus share this same throne. They said Jesus will be sitting next to His Father in the same Throne. They will share the throne. So in my mind, I pictured Jesus coming but saw now two people on one Throne. So I asked them if they believed that it is possible that what John saw, (when he sees One standing amongst the lampstands), couldn't that have been the Father/Jesus. They said no, it was Jesus because the Father was in the Holy of Holies. I then pointed out that there is only one God and opened Isaiah 9:6 showing that Jesus, God the Father and the Holy Spirit are all in the same verse. They said yes, there is one God but two people. This leaves me wondering if we will see identical twins on one throne coming in the clouds of Heaven. It was more complicated and in depth than I could possible try to explain but needless to say, I found myself shaking my head and in disbelief at some of which I heard today. Soo....I need help. Is this making sense!! Boy oh boy, what pictures are in my mind. There is one God and I believe that this same God is Jesus Christ Almighty. Am I totally in babylon here? God Bless all, Denise | ||
| Max |
Denise, maybe you should think about delinking from those poisoned people for awhile in order to nourish yourself. Maybe at this point in your experience you still need more milk. Remember, Paul did not witness at all for three years after his conversion. | ||
| Cas |
Denise, I do admire you for taking the cults on. I have taken the stance that I do not spend much time with the cults that come knocking at my door. For one thing I think it is an insult to the cause of Christianity when cults go around knocking on doors bothering people that are busy and interupting what ever they may be doing. They are there to change your mind because they have all the "truth". This happened to me the other day, I live next door to a Mormon Church and I wondered how long it would take them to find me. Two young men were there at my door, couldn't have been older than maybe 20. They proceded to tell me they absolutely had the "truth", they have prayed about it and the Lord has answered. I asked them if they have read the GodMakers, they responded yes, among other critical writings of Mormanism. I had to sigh because it is so typical to attack the messenger instead of the message, which is what they did. And of course claimed that most of it was lies! So anyway I told them I have just come out of a cult with a prophet and I was not interested in another one. He looked me straight in the eye and told me with every fiber of his being he knew without a doubt he was being led by God and had the truth. I looked him straight in the eye and responded with at one time I too said the same thing and knew I had the "truth". So my prayers are with you Denise to be strong but don't let yourself get too caught up into the confusion. God Bless. | ||
| Denisegilmore |
Max, Perhaps you're right about me delinking from them. I don't mind studying if it can be an honest study. You know, everyone has something to comment on or Scripture to point out. I do find that I might be butting my head up against bricks. And believe me, the bricks aren't breaking. So, I will reconsider another study, although there is one person involved that is listening to Scripture I, in my limited knowledge, try to point out. This leaves me with a sense of duty. This one happens to be my best friend and I love her dearly. I'm going to have to do a thorough examination of the 'veil' though. It is something that rouses my curiosity too much to ignore. Thank you for your input, God Bless you, Denise | ||
| Denisegilmore |
Cas, I have had the Mormons study with me too. But I kept insisting that we stick with the Bible and not the book of mormon. They were very kind but absolutely unwilling to stick with just the Bible. This study with the Sdas is a little different. They use the Bible and the Bible only but still I am seeing a tendency in the one in the 'lead' position, refusing to see any other Scripture but what is defined by their theology to fit their doctrine. What a tremendous poison it can be to pick and choose what Scripture best fits your doctrine! The confusion is outstanding, even to them. But will they admit it, absolutely not. To do so would make them, in their belief, an apostate. But my best friend is where my concern is pointed. My best friend has been raised for 80 plus years, an adventist and she is listening to what I have to say. I am thankful to our Lord that He put her in my life and even more thankful to our Lord that He gave her a heart to want to know truth. These studies have been designed to be held in her home. Not designed that way by me but this fact of it being in her home is why I feel obligated to attend. In the meanwhile, I see her daily and always manage to through in a few Scriptures that point out the Gospel Truth. This is where I thank the Lord, for the opportunity to share His riches to one that never knew them. I realize that my posts yesterday showed my absolute disbelief and utter frustration but then again, perhaps it was meant to be posted. If there are, and I know there are, adventists lurking, then they too can realize that they are not alone. Who knows, maybe that's just me with grandiose thinking. But I do pray that whatever I post goes to the Glory of God. Whether that be my excitement or frustration and even my confusion. I am trying desperately to undo what has been done to my programming. I thank you Cas for posting to me. I don't often see you but when you do post, you always have something good to offer. May God Bless you, Denise | ||
| Dale |
Denise, I don't know if you have visited Des Ford's website or not, but he has a good discussion of this topic under "Hebrews 9" and other headings. You might find it helpful. www.goodnewsunlimited.org Dale | ||
| Denisegilmore |
Dale, Thank you and I will go there tonight. For me, this isn't just a matter of winning a debate. It's a matter of exposing the real light, God Almighty in His Son Jesus Christ and the atonement that has been made for us. I know that for myself, being in that dark pit dug out for me in the sda doctrine, was one of despare. To think that others are in that very pit has me compelled to do what I am doing. Not just the sdas though, there are others who do not know Jesus Christ and feel that religion means working our way to Heaven. These are the ones that seem to come into my life. What am I to do? Remain silent? Never! I cannot do that for there is a power working in me that forces me to proclaim Jesus's Death for our sins. The Gospel, I'm noticing, is one that has alot of people wondering if I'm of satan or God. Amazing. Although not so amazing when I read that it is a sword that divides. I see my friend who is striving diligently to acquire Salvation and then keep it,,,this breaks my heart. God Bless you Dale, Denise | ||
| Denisegilmore |
word correction to above post. instead of 'despare' it should be 'despair' I think. | ||
| Dale |
Denise, I can understand your desire to help others see the light. I too have a burning desire for my SDA friends that they too know the true joy of freedom in Christ that I have found. Then I go back in my own life 10-20 years and recall all of the walls that I had built around me. Talk about a covering veil! I would not even read Desmond Ford's arguements. I "knew" he was wrong without reading what he had to say. The same was true for Walter Rea, Sydney Cleveland, and others. I considered anyone that left the church a poor deluded soul. (NOW I ARE ONE!!) I am thoroughly convinced that it is only when the Holy Spirit enters our lives that we can truly open up to His leading. The cracks in the walls began opening as I began to really understand salvation by grace and grace alone. It is interesting that in my professional life, I have always considered it very important to look at all sides of a matter before making a decision. Yet when it came to religion, I refused to look at anything controversial or anti-SDA because I "might be deceived". What I failed to realize then, and where I unfortunately consider many of my friends to be right now, is in a terrible state of deception; one that allows other humans to control our thoughts and minds by perpetuating this myth that we must read only what comes from SDA approved literature, etc. Bottom line, Denise, is don't be discouraged and don't feel that it is you who either fails or succeeds in convincing others of the true gospel. Remember that this is the work of the Holy Spirit and you are an instrument, so don't take their responses personally. God Bless you! Dale | ||
| Denisegilmore |
Hello Dale, You are absolutely right about that 'veil'. I suppose that is what I'm up against with many of whom I try to share the Godspell (Gospel) with. From experience, here a little, there a little, I'm learning when to quit trying with some. I had that very veil with regards to the Sabbath. For others not to believe the Sabbath was something I almost would get sick over. I had some who would call me after they discovered that I was attending the sda Church and try to warn me, but would I listen? No. I would have died with regard to the Sabbath "truth". Praise God that He is patient! So, I do understand why some are so blind, I was. I know that my post showed alot of discouragement and frustration the other night and with good reason no less. But I am fully convinced, as you have pointed out, that the Holy Spirit will do the work and that I am not responsible nor will I be negligent. I will always try at least a few times to share this great news of our salvation. Nonetheless, I am learning that there is a time to 'shake the dust off of my sandals' too. Thank you for your encouragement, it is a gift from God. God Bless you Dale, Denise | ||
| Cindy |
Denise, Hi...I have been blessed in reading your comments. The "veil" concept is really true. To me it often seems that belief in JESUS is given a slightly secondary role. The 10 Commandments point us to Christ, for who of us could obey them? He perfectly kept them for us and we now need Him to help us keep them! Christ is in place as our helper... with the Law being the supreme revelation of God, the transcript of His character! And so the focus is subtly put back on the Law and IT is elevated instead of Christ. Just so hard for them to see that Christ is the fulfillment of the Sabbath and our 24/7, 365/year continual REST... I loved your comment, "I had that very veil with regards to the Sabbath. For others not to believe the Sabbath was something I almost would get sick over." This is so true with many I've talked with! I know some of my relatives would feel that sickness! They can't believe you can possibly consider that that day is not set aside as Holy for "infinity and beyond!" ( I just watched Toy Story 2!! :-)))) Others are more open to discussion and yet, in the final anaylsis, they still maintain the continuing validity of the seventh day, eternally set apart set apart as "holy time". I just moved across country and had attended church the last Sabbath there, going out to eat at a restaurant with some dear older friends. They would take me out to eat many Sabbaths after church and we had many conversations over the "holiness" of that day. Going out to eat on the Sabbath is a whole other issue! HOW do we KEEP a day HOLY? WHAT is HOLY, WHAT is NOT!?? The demarcation between "sacred" and "secular" things and times is something I've disagreed with for many years! I think it is dangerous to separate your life into these compartments. ALL of life is sacred when you abandon yourself to the wonderful grace of God!! Anyway... my friends always concluded on the Sabbath topic that it was "written in stone by the finger of God" and that I was on shaky ground to abandon it! These people are very grace centered and loving folks who have even attended a Presbyterian church on Sundays for the last 15 years, along with Saturdays in Adventism! They don't believe in "1844" or the "authority" of EGW's writings in every area, but the Sabbath issue is something they could not see as I do (Jesus being the fulfillment and our true Sabbath Rest...) They thought it was I who had the veil over my eyes!! Anyway, the day before I actually moved, I recieved an overnight special delivery letter from them. Basically, it was a last ditch chance to persuade me about "the Sabbath"! When I find it again in my mess here in my apartment I may post some of it so you all can help me respond (again!) to them. I must say, though, that these folks have been great friends and a real help to me when I have needed it. Blessing to you, Denise.... Grace always, Cindy | ||
| Max |
Hi Cindy, Enjoyed your post, some of which was, ^^To me it often seems that belief in JESUS is given a slightly secondary role. The 10 Commandments point us to Christ, for who of us could obey them? He perfectly kept them for us and we now need Him to help us keep them! ^^ I agree and believe that this "slightly secondary role" (you're such a diplomat!) is really just a code term for Christ being a "slightly secondary god." The real meaning of which is: "not God at all." For in Scripture Jesus is either fully man AND fully God or he is nothing. There can be no compromise on this point, for it is the heresy from which all other SDA heresies hang. Here's what I believe: Jesus did not "just barely keep" the Old Testament law. He MORE than kept it. He kept it so well that he broke it in the sense that he EXCEEDED it. For example (KJV John 5:18): "The Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God." The law that Jesus really fulfilled, and did not destroy, is the eternal law that is Himself as "equal with God," the law of love. For (KJV Matthew 22:37-40), "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." Note that these two commandments are found in neither the Ark of the Old Covenant nor in the Ten Commandments of the Old Covenant, for they EXCEED the Old Covenant. Hear the author of Hebrews 7:11-12 KJV: "If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made OF NECESSITY A CHANGE OF THE LAW." Therefore, Jesus Christ IS the "changed" law, the New Covenant law, the "everlasting covednant" law, the "both old and new" law, the law of love. And nowhere in all of Christ's New Covenant Commandments is to be found circumcising, Sabbath-keeping, tithe-paying, ham-shunning, jewlery-shunning, wine-shunning, people-shunning ("remnantizing" or "mark-of-the-beasting" of people), or any of the other "distinctives" that make SDAs "a peculiar people." Hope I didn't get too carried away, Cindy. God love you, Max of the Cross | ||
| Cindy |
Max, No, you didn't get carried away, :-)); but I know the feeling! It is such good news that I get worked up talking about it! I really like how you stated that Jesus didn't just "barely" keep the 10 Commandments... He MORE THAN KEPT IT, HE EXCEEDED IT!! This thought really clicked in my head this time... I was often taught that Jesus resisted temptation and so can we--with His help...we can BE LIKE JESUS! But if we are to be like Jesus we would have to claim equality with God! The teaching, too, seemed to be of Jesus fighting hard to live up to the claims of this "Law"... this Law that was almost, in itself, a sacred object! Jesus as being the full and actual embodiment of the eternal, (old and new!) law of love is a wonderful message! Why are people afraid to TRUST IN HIM ALONE for the COMPLETE and FREE salvation by GRACE ALONE!? And then,TRUST IN HIM ALONE, His promises of the Holy Spirit's guidance and encouragement for living and growing "IN" THIS GRACE IN WHICH WE NOW STAND!!! And, again, this is growing "IN" the FREE GIFT OF GRACE we already HAVE!!! :-)) "Now if the ministry that brought death, which was ENGRAVED IN LETTERS ON STONE, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its' glory, fading though it was, will not the ministry of the Spirit be EVEN MORE GLORIOUS? If the ministry that condemns men is glorious, HOW MUCH MORE GLORIOUS is the ministry that brings righteousness! For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the SURPASSING GLORY. And if what was fading away came with glory, HOW MUCH GREATER is the glory of that which LASTS! Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold." 2 Corinthians 3:7-12 Grace always, Cindy | ||
| Denisegilmore |
Hello Cindy, I'm so glad you too get all excited about this Good News. I'm especially glad that it as you say, finally 'clicked' in your head. Praise the Lord! For me, it was like taking a flight with the speed of lightening. The veil had been removed and I soared on the wings of eagles..Isaiah 40:31 "but those who hope in the Lord will renew their strength, They will soar on wings like eagles; they will run and not grow weary, they will walk and not be faint" It's such a great joy that to see those I have grown to care about and love striving, hoping they will be good enough, is heartbreaking. Jesus Christ has already paid our debt, Jesus Christ is currently our High Priest in the order of Melchizedec ever living to make intercession for us. If only the veil in those I know (and don't know) would just split, allowing just a hint of sunshine to show through, they could see and experience an ever growing relationship with our Lord Jesus. I will keep praying for this to happen. In the meantime, I will keep talking the Gospel for it is our Salvation. I will trust in the Lord for He knows what He has planned for all people. I do believe that when Jesus was teaching on the Mount, that He made it very clear that we are utterly incapable of keeping the 10 commandments, especially since He had raised the standards onto such a high ground that it brings home our helplessness and need of Him. Thanks be to our Lord Jesus Christ for His love. Before I realized how much He loved me, that is to say, before that 'veil' was rent in two, I knew I was a sinking ship. Mercy and Justice kissed each other and for this, I'm the overjoyous, lunatic that people encounter..:) As for knowing what is Holy and what is not, this, I believe is written in our hearts and minds. Although I don't believe as mere mortals we will ever comprehend its profoundness or depth. I do know that what is Holy to us is probably not even close to what God considers Holy. We are limited still as mortals. God is BIG! God bless you Cindy and hang on to what has clicked in your head. It will truly set you free! Standing under His blood, Denise | ||
| Denisegilmore |
P.S. Cindy, Did you ever wonder about the spiritual referrence or implications to Moses dropping those stones and breaking them after his descent from the mountain? Just something I think about quite often. God Bless, Denise | ||
| Denisegilmore |
I'm back with another report of my Bible study with the sda's today. Todays Topic: The Sanctuary. Again as with the last report I will type what was handed me in it's entirety. "The assumption that 'ta hagia' refers to the most holy place in chapter 9 is unwarrented. The word does not mean 'the most holy place', but rather 'the holies' or 'the sanctuary' and is better so translated. Note: a) The term, 'Ta Hagia' (Holy Places) functions in the context of Hebrews as a noun. It is derived from the adjective 'hagios', meaning 'holy'. It is generally conceded to appear in Hebrews in the form of a neuter plural noun except in chapter 9:1, where it is written as a neuter singular noun. b) The use of this plural form (ta hagia) as a designation for the entire sanctuary is common in the Septuagint (the LXX, Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible made in the third and second centuries B.C.). The author of Hebrews consistently draws his citations of the OT from this version. c) In the light of this and the overall context of Hebrews 8-10 it is believed by the Daniel and Revelation committee that 'ta hagia' should be regarded as a general term that should be translated in most instances as 'sanctuary' unless the context clearly indicates otherwise (such as in chapter (9:2,3). In the following chart, one can see a sampling of how various versions have dealt with the translation of 'ta hagia': Goodspeed translation of 8:2= sanctuary New English Bible translation of 8:2= sanctuary New Int. Version translation of 8:2= sanctuary NRSV translation of 8:2= sanctuary NASB translation of 8:2= sanctuary Goodspeed on 9:1= sanctuary New English Bible on 9:1= sanctuary New Int. Version on 9:1= sanctuary NRSV on 9:1= sanctuary NASB on 9:1= sanctuary Goodspeed on 9:2= sanctuary New English Bible on 9:2= holy place New Int. Version on 9:2= holy place NRSV on 9:2= holy place NASB on 9:2= holy place Goodspeed on 9:3= Inner sanctuary New English Bible on 9:3= Most Holy Place New Int. Version on 9:3= Most holy place NRSV on 9:3= Holy of Holies NASB on 9:3= Holy of Holies Goodspeed on 9:8= sanctuary New English Bible on 9:8= sanctuary New Int. Version on 9:8= Most Holy Place NRSV on 9:8= sanctuary NASB on 9:8= holy place Goodspeed on 9:12= sanctuary New English Bible on 9:12= sanctuary New Int. Version on 9:12= Most Holy place NRSV on 9:12= Holy place NASB on 9:12= holy place Goodspeed on 9:24= sanctuary New English Bible on 9:24= sanctuary New Int. Version on 9:24= sanctuary NRSV on 9:24= sanctuary NASB on 9:24= holy place Goodspeed on 9:25= sanctuary New English Bible on 9:25= sanctuary New Int. Version on 9:25= Most Holy Place NRSV on 9:25= Holy Place NASB on 9:25= holy place Goodspeed on 10:19= sanctuary New English Bible on 10:19= sanctuary New Int. Version on 10:19= Most Holy Place NRSV on 10:19= sanctuary NASB on 10:19= holy place Goodspeed on 13:11= sanctuary New English Bible on 13:11= sanctuary New Int. Version on 13:11= Most Holy Place NRSV on 13:11= sanctuary NASB on 13:11= holy place A few notes on these texts: 8:2 The word refers to the sanctuary as a whole-note parallel to 'true tabernacle'. 9:1 The 'earthly sanctuary' refers to the sanctuary as a whole. 9:2 The context makes the meaning of the outer room clear (contents mentioned). 9:3 This refers to the inner compartment, confirmed by the context-verst 4. 9:8 The 'sanctuary' as given by the RSV, Knox, Goodspeed, NEB, and NRSV is in harmony with the context, note the parallel to the 'first tabernacle' which verse 9 says was 'symbolic for the present time in which are offered both gifts and sacrifices' and are in verse 10 'concerned with foods and drinks...imposed until the time of reformation' (when Christ would be a better High Priest). These allusions indicate the entire sanctuary." End of their report for this week. I am offering this up for anyone with any knowledge of this stuff to help me to defend the truth that Jesus Christ died for our sins for all time. End of report. This is what they have a hard time believing and I'm terrible at trying to explain it as well. I do point out the verses and they do read them but it is not penetrating. I was challenged today to bring them proof in writing (the Bible is not good enough I guess). Praise God that today I FINALLY got a printer to be able to print out material and hand it to them to read over. This is a gift from our Lord Jesus and I am forever indebted to Him for giving me the privilege. One main reason that I continue this is because there is one of the two that is listening. Also the other one truly believes that without knowing all the doctrines taught by the sda Church, one cannot be saved and should not be baptized. To hear this today was not a surprise. Pray that I will glorify the Lord in what He has me doing and that He will bring Truth to their hearts. Among other topics that came up today was Daniel 8:14 and the rendition of the 'morning and evening'. I contended with what little knowledge I have that it is not and should not be rendered years as the same word is used in Creation week. I brought up the word 'boqer' (hebrew). I will again recheck that this night to be sure I've used the correct word that applies not only to Daniel's 'mornings and evenings' but also to the first 6 days of creation. It is further explained to me by them (the lead of the study) that the writer of Hebrews was referring to a 'future time' but not their time. This another example of how they continue to hang on to the 'investigative judgement'. Their stance is that the writer of Hebrews was referring to 1844. This is how I came to ask how they can say this and this is where the 'day/year' principle comes in. If this principle falls then all of their time on the run down of prophecy falls. Hoping to become more clear in my posts. Any assistance is welcomed, not only how to write a more clear post but most importantly in defusing what is being taught to me, to them. and until next weeks update... God Bless all, Denise (the berean) | ||
| Cas |
Denise, Some time ago I bookmarked this study called Investigating The Investigative Judgement by Larry Pahl. Thought maybe you would be interested in checking it out. It's not necessarily a quick read. http://members.aol.com/larrypahl/dan814-2.htm | ||
| Richardjr |
Denise, The context of those vereses you studied with the SDA all point to the fact that Christ went to the Most Holy Place. God must have a real good sense of humor. Can you imagine sharing the gospel with someone on skid row and saying to that person, "you know before you really get this right who must know Greek so you can interpet "ta hagia" right." I remember being in a meeting where Dr. Hasel said that it all came down to whether it was the feminine or masculine fourth horn of Dan. 8:8. So according to him not only would a person need to know Greek but Hebrew. I would gamble on the fact that even half of SDA clergy have a working knowledge of Greek and not more than 5% of them have a working knowledge of Hebrew. |
