| Author | Message | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 135 Registered: 6-2006  |
I think I asked this before, but I can't find the thread! Jeremy mentioned this in the "when did you discover" thread and it's been dogging me again - My brother in law travels with a replica of "The sanctuary" and he is so brainwashed that it's all he talks about when we get together as a family. He goes on and on about the "Satan as the scapegoat" part of the sanctuary doctrine and I don't understand any of it. 1) What bible verses are used to support it? 2) What bible verses shoot it down? 3) Is there a good link to study? The bil was preaching it the other night at my in-laws' house and I just left the room because he makes me so sick. My husband is convinced that the story is true, and tried to convince me, but it sounded so outlandish that I couldn't wrap my brain around it - plus being that I don't get it, I couldn't dispute it, even though I knew it wasn't true. Thanks! Leigh Anne | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1455 Registered: 10-2004  |
Leigh Anne, 1. There are absolutely zero Bible verses which would even seem to imply in the least that Satan is the scapegoat. NO Christian church has ever taught this horrific doctrine. The only two churches that I know of that have ever taught that Satan is the scapegoat are the Seventh-day Adventist Church and the Church of Satan. While some Christians have believed that the word "scapegoat" in Leviticus 16 should instead be translated "Azazel" as a proper name (perhaps for a demon, or Satan, etc.)--NONE of them have believed that the goat actually represented Azazel, but instead that the goat went to Azazel. 2. Some things that shoot it down are: All sin offerings had to be without spot or blemish (Leviticus 4). And the two goats for the Day of Atonement in Leviticus 16 (which would later be separated as the goat to be slaughtered and the goat to be released in the wilderness [the scapegoat]) were both to be "for a sin offering" (Leviticus 16:5). Satan is not without spot or blemish and he is not eligible to be a sin offering!!!! Also, these two goats in Leviticus 16 were totally identical and equal--they had to cast lots to decide which one would be slaughtered and have it's blood sprinkled in the Most Holy Place and which one would be the scapegoat. Jesus and Satan are not equal or identical!!! Also, they were to make atonement with the scapegoat (Leviticus 16:10). Satan cannot atone for our sins! In Leviticus 16:22 it says of the scapegoat: "And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited" (KJV). Compare that with Isaiah 53:11 talking about the Messiah: "for he shall bear their iniquities" Also, John 1:29 says: "Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!" (NASB.) Jesus is the one who bears our iniquities and takes away our sins--NOT Satan! This doctrine comes not from Scripture, but from their false prophet Ellen G. White who says that our sins cannot be blotted out of existence and removed from us and remembered no more against us and we can't say we are saved--until Satan bears our sins, makes atonement for them, and pays the penalty for our sins. It is the most Satanic doctrine imaginable. If the doctrine is true then we should be worshipping Satan as savior! Ellen G. White wrote:
3. Here is a link about the scapegoat which helped me give up EGW: http://www.truthorfables.com/Scapegoat.htm I truly believe that this horrific doctrine (which is part of the SDA "Sanctuary doctrine") does not get enough attention/refutation in books, on the internet, etc. That's just a few brief points, but if you have any more questions, don't hesitate to ask! Jeremy (Message edited by jeremy on August 17, 2006) (Message edited by jeremy on August 17, 2006) | ||
| Mwh Registered user Username: Mwh Post Number: 145 Registered: 4-2006  |
I read a pretty good article on the subject here: http://www.ellenwhite.org/sanctuary.htm Its a really interesting topic and really shows how far away from Christianity SDA really is. | ||
| Mwh Registered user Username: Mwh Post Number: 146 Registered: 4-2006 |
I've read a pretty good article on the subject here: http://www.ellenwhite.org/sanctuary.htm Its a really interesting topic and really shows how far away from Christianity SDA really is. | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 136 Registered: 6-2006 |
Jeremy, thank you so much! I wanted to ask you personally but didn't know how. This is about as clear of an explaination as I can get! I told my husband that this doctrine that his bro-in-law is preaching is clearly another gospel. When I think of all the money and energy and effort that this man is putting into the "King's Castle Exhibit" it makes me physically ill. Thank you for the help. You're right, it IS horrific! | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 137 Registered: 6-2006 |
Thanks to you too, Mwh! When I think of how beautiful Jesus' sacrifice for us is, and then how someone can come along and just deny it and twist it into a completely different and false gospel JUST TO SAVE FACE, I'm disgusted. There are just no words to express it! | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1456 Registered: 10-2004 |
It appears that in that article at the above link on ellenwhite.org, that E.S. Ballenger had not fully given up the SDA doctrine. He still believed that Satan was the scapegoat, but he thought that he only suffered for his own sins. But that still is not Biblical and doesn't fit with Leviticus 16, as I show in my above post. Jesus is the Scapegoat who took away our sins into the wilderness ("the middle of nowhere"/non-existence!).  Jeremy (Message edited by jeremy on August 17, 2006) | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 2292 Registered: 11-2002 |
Dear Leigh Anne, Your bil actually travels with a replica of the temple? Wow! That is really heavy duty! And, Jeremy, do you have your own website with these weird EGW quotes easially accessable in one location for all to read? Also, go to carm as there is a great discussion going on over there with some of the more interesting EGW quotes. It's really some off the wall stuff. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 4474 Registered: 12-2003  |
Leigh Anne, did your BIL come to Loma Linda last year with that traveling sanctuary? It was here for about 2 weeks, and it came from a self-supporting academy in the south. We went, and we both had a hard time restraining ourselves from shouting out "No! Heresy!!" as they explained Adventist "salvation", the IJ, etc., in publicly acceptable words. It was really frustrating. Colleen | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 140 Registered: 6-2006 |
Oh man, Susan! My bil has been with this traveling side-show from the beginning, at least 10 years ago. Thankfully he lives in OK and I live in CA, so I see him maybe once a year. However my husband's sister (bil's wife) and each of their 4 kids are involved in some way with the "King's Castle". Their main mission is of course, to sign people up with the church, although they like to say they're "spreading God's word", which is a crock because they're actually spreading the sanctuary doctrine. Blessings to you | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 141 Registered: 6-2006 |
I'm sure that was his group you saw Colleen! They come to Loma Linda at least once a year because we have a lot of family living in Loma Linda and La Sierra... My sweet 21 year old nephew (in-law) preached about his involvement with the sanctuary tour in Sabbath School last Saturday. Thankfully I missed it! I love that kid but can't stand that his Dad has indoctrinated him so deeply in that heresy. Even my parents-in-law think it's a little over the top. I bet you were frustrated!! Somebody needs to organize a protest... Leigh Anne | ||
| Mwh Registered user Username: Mwh Post Number: 147 Registered: 4-2006 |
Jeremy, you are right Jesus is represented by the two goats! But it is good to remember that the enemy will be punished for his own sins. If having a doctrine like this doesn't make SDA a false religion / sect, I don't know what may cause it. | ||
| Raven Registered user Username: Raven Post Number: 527 Registered: 7-2004  |
Is this a different traveling sanctuary show you're talking about, or is the name changed to Messiah's Mansion? Recently I had family telling me about it coming near them and they went to it. Here's the website: http://www.messiahsmansion.com/about_us.htm Their website says next to nothing except that they use the sanctuary to explain the way of salvation. I know there has to be an SDA twist to what they say. Does anyone know how much detail they actually get into? I ended up not responding because I couldn't find any hard facts on what they tell people. In my opinion, if God still wanted the sanctuary services around because it would be useful to explain salvation, He wouldn't have had it all destroyed in AD70. | ||
| Pw Registered user Username: Pw Post Number: 491 Registered: 6-2004 |
Amazing how something like this topic on Satan being the scapegoat didn't even faze me under the SDA influence, only when I broke free of it did I see how absurd this teaching was. Among a numerous list of other SDA progaganda. | ||
| Brian3 Registered user Username: Brian3 Post Number: 60 Registered: 8-2005 |
WOW! "The Messiah's Mansion President, Clayton Leinneweber..." "Currently Clayton Leinneweber teaches Sophomore and Junior Bible class at Oklahoma Academy and as part of their curriculum they learn to give tours during the school year." http://www.oklahomaacademy.org/about_oa.htm "We are a unique boarding high school, operated by Seventh-Day Adventists" "We believe that the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy are given by divine inspiration so that we can truly understand who God is and more fully comprehend His perfect plan in our lives. We believe that as an instructive institution, the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy should form the foundational principles of our educational philosophy. We believe that Jesus is coming again soon and our mission should be to prepare ourselves and others to meet Him." | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 4475 Registered: 12-2003 |
Yes, Ravenóit was called Messiah's Mansion when it came to Loma Linda. I actually went twiceóonce with Richard and once with a former SDA friend who wanted to see it, too. The tours were led by different students, and they actually dealt with different details. I think it depended upon who led the tour as to how detailed it got. My tour with my friend dealt with much more typcial SDA "stuff" than did my tour with Richardóalthough that one was bad enough! In one they dealt much more directly with the 10 Commandments and the scapegoat than they did in the other. It was upsetting to me, though, the way they declared the meanings of the symbols of all the furniture according to Ellen. I remembered hearing almost all of them at some point in the past, but coming to it from a new covenant perspective, I realized they completely destroyed the meanings. For example, they identified the flames on the candlesticks at being the Holy Spirit, but then they emphasized that we need to keep the flame burning by engaging in Bible study, etc. In other words, our interaction with the Holy Spirit in us depended upon our diligence, not upon God's keeping power. The whole tour was like thatóit was backwards. Instead of pointing forward to fulfillment, it was used to emphasize that if we are properly observant, we, too, can experience the results of atonement. And it was all explained in words that SOUNDED like they were talking about Jesus, but in reality it was an inside-out gospelóand it was confusing and subtle. I was SO annoyed by the whole thing! Raven, I LOVE your observation that if God had wanted to use the sanctuary as a continuing object lesson, He wouldn't have destroyed the whole thing in AD 70! Colleen | ||
| Raven Registered user Username: Raven Post Number: 528 Registered: 7-2004 |
Thanks for specific descriptions, Colleen. Wow! Here I was beginning to think I was so far out of SDA thinking by now, and this really struck me that it's still very natural for me to feel what you just described, even though I do know God does it all. Yet, sometimes I feel so guilty for not spending time every single day in the Bible, but only a few times a week. I know it's not salvational, but I tend to worry that I'm not doing my part to maintain a connection with the Holy Spirit. I certainly am thankful for God's keeping power, because if it were up to me, I'd be sunk. | ||
| Insearchof Registered user Username: Insearchof Post Number: 82 Registered: 8-2005 |
You know, it was here that I came across the idea that the scapegoat was actually two functions of Christ's ministry - one as the sacrifice, one as the sin-bearer. That idea rattled my cage! I read Lev 16 and realized that the SDA belief of Satan as the scapegoat was wrong, wrong, wrong! I had already given up 1844 by this time and had serious issues with EGW as well. You could say that realizing that Satan was NOT the scapegoat was the final issue that pushed me all the way out. You would be surprised (well, maybe not) at how hard it is to get an SDA to see another point of view regarding the scapegoat. I have brought it up and they will confess they have never considered the problem of both goats being without blemish, etc. But the next breath is that we leave no mechanism to handle 'the sin problem'. Where, they ask, does the sin go? It must go to the one who is utimately responsible - Satan. Mentioning that Jesus bore our sin and that somehow those sis are as far from us as east is from west does not answer the issue for them. They believe that heaven is polluted with the confessed sins of the faithful and if Jesus is actually bearing them, then at some point those sins (or the 'guilt for' or the 'responsiblility for' them) will have to be moved to another (Satan) or we make Jesus forever more one that is actively bearing sin or we leave confessed sins in the MHP, thereby polluting heaven. The whole doctrine of 1844 and the IJ is to explain how God plans to 'fix' what is 'wrong' in heaven. Read Great Controvesy, pg 486-487 (something like that) where EGW refers to our sins being placed on Satan...John 1:29 says Jesus 'takes away the sins of the world'. What a damning quote Jeremy has from EGW! Either EGW was referring to Jesus when she wrote that (I think she must have been - which shows you how convoluted and confused SDAs really are about the implications that Satan is the scapegoat) or she was referring to Satan (which in my opinion is too awful to consider). But then, that would be the logical end of the Adventist belief regarding the scapegoat. Sorry to ramble... InSearchOf | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 4476 Registered: 12-2003 |
InSearchOf, Thank you for reminding us of that core heresy of the IJ. You're rightóAdventists can't consider the scapregoat to be Jesus because, as you say, they believe heaven is actually defiled by our sins which Christ's blood "covered" and transferred to heaven, thus defiling heaven, until the IJ is over and those sins can be transferred out of heaven. It's such heresy! The fact is that in the OT sanctuary services, the blood NEVER defiled. It CLEANSED! That was the point of the Day of Atonement. The blood of those sacrifices was carried into the the sanctuary and sprinkled on that curtain in order to symbolize Chris't blood opening the new and living way (see Hebrews 9-10) to God. Hebrews 10 identifies that curtain separating the compartments as Christ's body. When the High Priest sprinkled blood on that curtain every year, he was foreshadowing Christ's body bleeding on the cross. Ellen really "did a number" on Adventist theology by claiming that the sacrificial blood carried sin into the presence of God. NO! It CLEANSED from sin! Jesus' blood is the life of all creation, the assurance that we have a perfect sacrifice and a perfect Mediator for all eternity. His blood did NOT defile heaven. Such teaching is pure blasphemy. With this scandalous teaching, Adventists actually say that Jesus' blood was not enough to cleanse us. No one who's actually saved, according to this teaching, can actually be saved until Satan bears their sins away. It just makes me outraged when I think about the blasphemy of this core Adventist doctrine. Thank you, Jesus, for being all we ever need!! Colleen | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1458 Registered: 10-2004 |
It makes me outraged, too, Colleen! The teaching is saying that Jesus' blood polluted the Presence of God (the Most Holy Place)--and the only one who can clean up God's Presence (God Himself)...is Satan! The teaching is that the only one who can actually take away our sins and actually get rid of our sins...is Satan! It's total BLASPHEMY!!! This is the worst doctrine ever invented in the history of the universe. InSearchOf, With regard to Ellen's quote (which is from a letter written in 1850): Are you wondering about who she's saying to pray to, or who she's saying the scapegoat is? I don't think there is any doubt that she is referring to Satan when she says "the scapegoat." Even in Early Writings, she taught that Satan bears the sins of the righteous. Her whole life she taught that Satan was the scapegoat--and never taught that Jesus was the scapegoat. Jeremy |
