| Author |
Message |
Lori
| | Posted on Monday, February 05, 2001 - 5:02 am: |     |
Christ died two deaths on the cross.
The "spiritual death" which was caused by being "cut off" from the presence of God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, hence the goat that was "cut off", "deserted". Christ was "deserted" by the Father because the sins of the world that he bore in his body.
And then he died the physical death in which he voluntarily gave up his life, he commended his own Spirit to God.
The deaths of the two goats are the perfect representation of the "deaths" of Christ.
WOW!! I'm continually amazed at how ALL scriptures neatly fits together!!!
Lori |
Lori
| | Posted on Monday, February 05, 2001 - 5:10 am: | |
Concerning the fact that the goat did not "bleed". Neither did Christ! Christ did not bleed to death on the cross. The physical death of Christ was an act of His own volition (John 10:18) |
Lori
| | Posted on Monday, February 05, 2001 - 5:22 am: | |
An Adventist family member recently told me that she was amazed to have heard about a text that said Christ was a hunchback. However, she couldn't identify a text that this was derived from. Have any of you heard this? I know that it was "found" while she was studying a book published by Adventist.
At first I thought she must have been referring to Isaiah 52, 53 where it is told that Christ would be disfigured and marred beyond human likeness but when I read these texts to her she said that no it wasn't that.
Any ideas as to where this idea came from and where it is in scripture?
Lori |
Max
| | Posted on Monday, February 05, 2001 - 10:50 am: | |
Lori,
I'm praising God for those insights He's given
you into the connection between the two goats
and Christ. Yes, both without-blemish animals
do typify Him.
Thanking Him for both you and the Berean,
Max of the Cross |
Denisegilmore
| | Posted on Monday, February 05, 2001 - 1:52 pm: | |
Hello Lori,
I'm so glad that you are finding TRUTH! Believe me, it's been a long road for me as these heretical doctrines are finally leaving this brain of mine.
And I had in this brain the doctrines from the WWCG (World Wide Church of God), and JWs (Jehovah's Witnessess) and other such denominations from my childhood though teen years.
All the legalism to last several lifetimes. Not just legalism but absolute heresies!
Lots and lots of reading, comtemplating, praying and talking with others too. Especially this heresy that is being taught.
My search began with the IJ and has stemmed into so many areas of SDA doctrine that it's unbelievable.
But it's worth every minute to find God's Truth and all along, HE was and is leading me! :)
As to that "hunchback" that your friend speaks of, I have some idea but will search it out before posting anything on that just yet.
God Bless you always,
DtB, your sister in Christ Jesus |
Sabra (Sabra)
| | Posted on Monday, August 25, 2003 - 5:09 pm: | |
Can we bring this back up? How do we reason with the SDA's saying that Satan is responsible for our sin and therefore must bear it ultimately. I hadn't heard the blame game before. I had heard that he would bear it but not because he was responsible for it. |
Jerry (Jerry)
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 - 10:56 am: | |
(sigh)
Hebrews 9:28 makes it very clear who bears our sins.
This is yet another flawed argument. The proper term is ìsyllogism fallacy by illicit major.î
The major premise is that ìSatan is responsible for all sin.î The Bible does not support this. The Bible portrays Satan providing temptation, but people are the ones who choose to sin. This premise also negates the fallen, sinful nature of people.
Anyone remember Flip Wilson? ìThe devil made me do it.î The point of those jokes was not that the devil actually made the character ìdo it.î Rather, that the character was shifting blame.
The unspoken minor premise is that ìthe one responsible for the sin always bears the sin.î
Again, this is not Scriptural. Therefore, by implication, this is an ìillicit minor.î
Understanding the true basis for the belief reveals another fallacious aspect of this statement. However the argument proceeds, this came from the writings of EGW where she falsely identified Satan as the scapegoat in the Day of Atonement ceremony.
Thus, we have a circular argument:
- EGW said Satan is the Scapegoat.
- The Scapegoat bears the sins of the congregation.
- Satan tempts people to sin.
- Therefore, Satan is responsible for that sin.
- Therefore, Satan bears all sin.
Could there be any more unsupported leaps of logic? Not likely! |
Jerry (Jerry)
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 - 11:10 am: | |
Oh, I forgot to add the last leg of the list:
- Which proves that Satan is the Scapegoat.
|
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 - 11:27 am: | |
Great explanation, Jerry. I like your pointing out that blaming Satan for sin negates human choice and our fallen nature.
In a sense, Satan is the Adventist's scapegoat. They use him to blur the truth about our fallen natures. With Satan to blame, we can call sin "inherited weakness" (EGW's term) which we have because of Satan's deceiving Eve in the beginning. In reality, though, our sin is more serious than inherited weakness. It is a dead spirit, completely disconnected from God. We are born dead. We're not sinners because Satan deceived and took advantage of Eve; we're sinners because Eve and Adam freely chose to disobey God, and that ripped a chasm in the universe between humanity and God.
It's really much less personally indicting to say, "Satan is responsible for the fact that I'm a sinner" than it is to say, "I'm born completely lost, unable to reconcile with God."
Praise God for Jesus!
Colleen |
Sabra (Sabra)
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 - 5:22 pm: | |
That was my first thought; that we are responsible for our own sin. Does anyone know why there were two goats used in the atonement? |
Chris (Chris)
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 - 6:11 pm: | |
Sabra, this is a point of debate among scholars, but I tend to come down with the camp that says BOTH goats represented Jesus' work of atonement. In fact, all aspects of the day of atonement represented Jesus' work. The priest that mediated for the people represented Jesus as our high priest and mediator before the father. The goat that was slain represented Jesus' sacrifice upon the cross for us. The blood sprinkled on the mercy seat represented the shed of Jesus. The mercy seat itself represented Jesus as the propitiation of our sins. The goat that carried the sins away from the camp represented the way Jesus has removed our sins from us as far as the east is from the west. Christ's work upon the cross was so far reaching and so multi-faceted that it required multiple symbols to express the breadth of what He has accomplished upon our behalf.
Chris Lee |
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - 1:02 pm: | |
As Chris said, no one earthly symbol could "stand in" for Jesus' work. Jesus both appeased God by offering a sacrifice for sin, and he WAS the sacrifice. In normal human terms, if a man tried to appease an angry monarch, he might bring him a gift or sacrificial offering. It would be physically impossible for him to be both the APPEASER and the APPEASEMENT.
That, I think, is why it required so many symbols to represent the work of Jesus. He did what absolutely no one but our Creator could do. He both died as the sin offering, and he carried the sins away from us in himself. Those two goats represented a perfect goat, unstained by sin, giving its life to make atonement for the Most Holy Place (as it says in Leviticus). The other represented an perfect goat taking the sins of the people into himself and removing them from the people. That goat atoned for the camp of Israel.
Jesus literally fulfilled in himself the role of priest, the role of blood sacrifice, the role of scapegoat, the role of the levites, the role of the city of refuge, the role of the sanctuary, the role of the law--you get the idea. No one thing could have shown us exactly what Jesus did. It required many synmbols to show us what Jesus actuallly did.
Colleen |
Doug222 (Doug222)
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - 1:27 pm: | |
Hmmm, I had never considered Jesus even fulfilling the role of the City of Refuge. This is truly amazing. It fits though. Every single detail of the Sanctuary/Old Covenant points to Jesus--even the fact that the Priest left his garments in the Most Holy Place before he exited, and Jesus left His grave clothes in the tomb. What does that say about the IJ, and where Jesus is now? Adventists say that Jesus is in the Most Holy place ministering, and that sin will not be totally dealt with until Satan is bound for 1,000 years (symbolic of the placing of the sins on the scape goat). In reality, sin was dealt with when Jesus exited the grave. "It is finished" means just what it says. All was finished--fulfilled.
Doug |
Jerry (Jerry)
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - 1:42 pm: | |
Nothing illustrates that better than this:
Quote:Hebrews 9:25-28
[25] Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the Holy Place yearly with blood not his own;
[26] for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared (past tense) once for all at the end of the age to put away sin (keep this in mind when you read the next verse)by the sacrifice of himself.
[27] And just as it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment, (Yeah, I know, this is the proof text that means there will be an investigative judgement, but the next verse throws that idea into the trash heap.)
[28] so (Note the word ìso.î It connects the previous verse to this one) Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but Whoa!! ìNOT to deal with sin, BUTî So, the judgement mentioned before does not refer to sin of the believer!! So, IT really MUST BE FINISHED!!!) to save those who are eagerly waiting for him. (Not even close to IJ)
|
Sabra (Sabra)
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - 2:33 pm: | |
We have been studying the sanctuary on Sunday nights and I have learned so much. I have to go to church now but I will try to get some of the really amazing symbols posted tonight. I know our pastor made a reference to a goat in another scripture and showed how it pointed right to Jesus, but I don't remember what it was. He has given details for every material that was used in building the temple and how it is shown in the NT.
Thank you for your replies. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page