The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined.
Posted By: Charity
The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/05/06 03:51 AM
I recently looked at belief #24 of our ‘fundamentals’ and thought it would be good to go over some of the points, and also it would be good for us to look at some of the things it leaves out – the sealing, the perfection of character found in the final generation etc.
For easy reference, I’ve quoted #24 in its entirety below.
quote:
24. Christ's Ministry in the Heavenly Sanctuary:
There is a sanctuary in heaven, the true tabernacle which the Lord set up and not man. In it Christ ministers on our behalf, making available to believers the benefits of His atoning sacrifice offered once for all on the cross. He was inaugurated as our great High Priest and began His intercessory ministry at the time of His ascension. In 1844, at the end of the prophetic period of 2300 days, He entered the second and last phase of His atoning ministry. It is a work of investigative judgment which is part of the ultimate disposition of all sin, typified by the cleansing of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. In that typical service the sanctuary was cleansed with the blood of animal sacrifices, but the heavenly things are purified with the perfect sacrifice of the blood of Jesus. The investigative judgment reveals to heavenly intelligences who among the dead are asleep in Christ and therefore, in Him, are deemed worthy to have part in the first resurrection. It also makes manifest who among the living are abiding in Christ, keeping the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, and in Him, therefore, are ready for translation into His everlasting kingdom. This judgment vindicates the justice of God in saving those who believe in Jesus. It declares that those who have remained loyal to God shall receive the kingdom. The completion of this ministry of Christ will mark the close of human probation before the Second Advent. (Heb. 8:1-5; 4:14-16; 9:11-28; 10:19-22; 1:3; 2:16, 17; Dan. 7:9-27; 8:13, 14; 9:24-27; Num. 14:34; Eze. 4:6; Lev. 16; Rev. 14:6, 7; 20:12; 14:12; 22:12.)
After reading the summary of AF Ballenger’s beliefs on the sanctuary in ‘The Doctrine of the Sanctuary’, put out by the Daniel and Revelation Committee of the GC my respect for him has increased. He was a good bible student and quite consistent in his approach. He remained an Adventist and always believed in the importance of 1844 to the day he died, but he had some major differences with us on certain aspects of the doctrine.
The following is not a difference because we have no position, but it is interesting. I learned that he believed that before Christ died and ascended into heaven, that Melchizedek along with angels was the intercessor for man in the heavenly sanctuary. It is a logical conclusion that springs from our own beliefs. If you look at the third and fourth sentences in the belief, you’ll see that we only allow for the intercession of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary since 31AD. So Ballenger tried to fill in the gap. Do you think he was right?
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/05/06 05:52 AM
It would appear that Jesus officiated through the earthly sanctuary until He transferred it to the heavenly snctuary in AD 31. Melchisedec, who is still in the grave awaiting the first resurrection, could not have filled in a so-called gap. Besides, there was no gap. Human priests served in the earthly sanctuary until Jesus took it over in AD 31.
DA 166
"Wherefore He is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them." Heb. 7:25. Though the ministration was to be removed from the earthly to the heavenly temple; though the sanctuary and our great high priest would be invisible to human sight, yet the disciples were to suffer no loss thereby. They would realize no break in their communion, and no diminution of power because of the Saviour's absence. While Jesus ministers in the sanctuary above, He is still by His Spirit the minister of the church on earth. He is withdrawn from the eye of sense, but His parting promise is fulfilled, "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." Matt. 28:20. While He delegates His power to inferior ministers, His energizing presence is still with His church. {DA 166.2}
EW 252, 253
I was also shown a sanctuary upon the earth containing two apartments. It resembled the one in heaven, and I was told that it was a figure of the heavenly. The furniture of the first apartment of the earthly sanctuary was like that in the first apartment of the heavenly. The veil was lifted, and I looked into the holy of holies and saw that the furniture was the same as in the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary. The priest ministered in both apartments of the earthly. He went daily into the first apartment, but entered the most holy only once a year, to cleanse it from the sins which had been conveyed there. I saw that Jesus ministered in both apartments of the heavenly sanctuary. The priests entered into the earthly with the blood of an animal as an offering for sin. Christ entered into the heavenly sanctuary by the offering of His own blood. The earthly priests were removed by death; therefore they could not continue long; but Jesus was a priest forever. Through the sacrifices and offerings brought to the earthly sanctuary, the children of Israel were to lay hold of the merits of a Saviour to come. And in the wisdom of God the particulars of this work were given us that we might, by looking to them, understand the work of Jesus in the heavenly sanctuary. {EW 252.2}
As Jesus died on Calvary, He cried, "It is finished," and the veil of the temple was rent in twain, from the top to the bottom. This was to show that the services of the earthly sanctuary were forever finished, and that God would no more meet with the priests in their earthly temple, to accept their sacrifices. The blood of Jesus was then shed, which was to be offered by Himself in the heavenly sanctuary. As the priest entered the most holy once a year to cleanse the earthly sanctuary, so Jesus entered the most holy of the heavenly, at the end of the 2300 days of Daniel 8, in 1844, to make a final atonement for all who could be benefited by His mediation, and thus to cleanse the sanctuary. {EW 253.1}
EW 260
The great Sacrifice had been offered and had been accepted, and the Holy Spirit which descended on the day of Pentecost carried the minds of the disciples from the earthly sanctuary to the heavenly, where Jesus had entered by His own blood, to shed upon His disciples the benefits of His atonement. But the Jews were left in total darkness. They lost all the light which they might have had upon the plan of salvation, and still trusted in their useless sacrifices and offerings. The heavenly sanctuary had taken the place of the earthly, yet they had no knowledge of the change. Therefore they could not be benefited by the mediation of Christ in the holy place. {EW 259.1}
FLB 202
The question, What is the sanctuary? is clearly answered in the Scriptures. The term "sanctuary," as used in the Bible, refers, first, to the tabernacle built by Moses, as a pattern of heavenly things; and, secondly, to the "true tabernacle" in heaven, to which the earthly sanctuary pointed. At the death of Christ the typical service ended. The "true tabernacle" in heaven is the sanctuary of the new covenant. {FLB 202.2}
Posted By: Jeff
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/05/06 07:15 AM
quote:
Melchisedec, who is still in the grave awaiting the first resurrection, could not have filled in a so-called gap.
MM, that was my first thought as I read the proposal. It would require a wrong belief about the state of the dead since we have no reason to think that Melchisedec is not dead.
Jeff
Posted By: Charity
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/05/06 03:39 PM
Ballenger believed in an immortal Melchizedek because it says Christ is an immortal Priest after his order. But I agree. Melchizedek was probably not immortal, but only a human type of Christ.
From one of your quotes above MM, Ellen White says:
quote:
Through the sacrifices and offerings brought to the earthly sanctuary, the children of Israel were to lay hold of the merits of a Saviour to come. And in the wisdom of God the particulars of this work were given us that we might, by looking to them, understand the work of Jesus in the heavenly sanctuary. {EW 252.2}
This agrees with scripture that the atonement made in the earthly sanctuary was symbolic only because it is not possible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sin. Hebrews 10:4. If that is so, the only effective atonement for the Hebrews under the Old Covenant was the atonement that they recieved by faith in the future work of Christ. The types could only point them to that work of Christ in heaven. That is the point of my thread on '1844, more significant than we my think'. I'll move on to other points now.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/06/06 07:33 AM
The ministry of the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" was, in the mind of God, a done deal. God "inhabits eternity", therefore, Jesus is the eternal Lamb of God. If the success of Jesus wasn't already a reality from God's eternal time perspective, the 4,000 years preceeding Jesus' life and death would have been a tragic and cruel mistake.
That is, if, from eternity, God wasn't already sure Jesus would be successful on the cross, and if, for example, it turned out Jesus refused to drink the cup in Gethsemane, then God would have been forced to destroy men and angels and all the other FMAs throughout His vast empire, and the 4,000 years of sin and suffering before Gethsemane would have been for naught.
Why? Because the eternal security of all creation hangs upon the outcome of the great controversy. And, if Jesus had failed or refused to pay our sin debt on the cross, then Satan would have won the war. God's only recourse in such a case would have been to destroy everyone because rebellion would have infected everyone beyond repair, and it would be cruel for Him to continue sustaining our lives in a hopeless situation.
As such, the faith of OT believers wasn't based on a future event, but rather, on a reality. The blood of the Lamb of God was, and has been, effectual and efficacious from eternity. Since God is not bound by time and space in the same way created beings are Jesus can be, in a literal sense, the "Lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world." By faith, OT believers embraced the Son of God as their Saviour and Sin-Bearer, not as a future event, but as a reality, then and now and forever.
TKM 18
The fall of man, with all its consequences, was not hidden from the Omnipotent. Redemption was not an afterthought, a plan formulated after the fall of Adam, but an eternal purpose, suffered to be wrought out for the blessing not only of this atom of a world, but for the good of all the worlds that God had created. {TMK 18.2}
DA 22
The plan for our redemption was not an afterthought, a plan formulated after the fall of Adam. It was a revelation of "the mystery which hath been kept in silence through times eternal." Rom. 16:25, R. V. It was an unfolding of the principles that from eternal ages have been the foundation of God's throne. From the beginning, God and Christ knew of the apostasy of Satan, and of the fall of man through the deceptive power of the apostate. God did not ordain that sin should exist, but He foresaw its existence, and made provision to meet the terrible emergency. So great was His love for the world, that He covenanted to give His only-begotten Son, "that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16. {DA 22.2}
Posted By: Charity
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/06/06 04:56 AM
I said I'd move on, but I'll make one closing comment:
I think we agree MM that not only the sacrifice, but also the priest-hood of Christ were the only means of salvation from the fall of Adam forward. Many Christians would probably agree with that intuitively. The implications of it are wonderful IMO. It makes 1844 that much more important, giving the Holiest ministry of Christ the same broad application as that of calvary. Wouldn't it stand to reason that if sacrifice applies to all, so does the application of the blood from the sacrifice by our high priest?
Posted By: Charity
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/06/06 05:17 AM
I’d like to focus now on the atonement aspect and contrast Adventist vs. Evangelical concepts of the atonement. Let’s start by looking at a statement from the June 9, 2005 issue of the Adventist Review in an article by Kevin Ferris on the Investigative Judgment. (His reference to belief 23 should read belief 24 with the recent addition of another tenet.)
quote:
So if atonement was made at Calvary, what did happen in 1844? More accurately, we should ask: "What didn't happen in 1844?" And the reply would be "Certainly not the making of sacrificial atonement," for that is clearly a Calvary event. But we will let the Adventist statement of beliefs answer the question: "In 1844, at the end of the prophetic period of 2300 days, [Christ] entered the second and last phase of His atoning ministry. It is a work of investigative judgment" (belief no. 23). The statement then goes on to further define this judgment as revelatory rather than determinative: "[This judgment] reveals to heavenly intelligences who among the dead are asleep in Christ and therefore, in Him, are deemed worthy to have part in the first resurrection. It also makes manifest who among the living are abiding in Christ, keeping the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, and in Him, therefore, are ready for translation" (italics supplied).
The bolded part is the key difference between the historic Adventist position and the Evangelical position. In this case however we have an Adventist writer advocating the evangelical position. There is some interesting material on this point from the book 'The Doctrine of the Sanctuary' that I'll try to post tomorrow.
Posted By: Colin
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/06/06 05:21 AM
.....Only in as much as the daily sacrifices of the sanctuary service applied to the whole nation, and indeed the whole world: grace kept 'em all alive. Christ's blood applied is normally only with our confession of faith in mind, so not all get that treatment, but all do get the straight grace protection as well as the inherited gift of saving righteousness which his sacrifice for all (as you mentioned) gives to all, so that faith may be experienced on hearing the word preached.
Posted By: Colin
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/06/06 05:29 AM
The Kevin Ferris statement you highlighted is clearly uninformed - and what of our official statement? - about Jesus' job up there. He's working with us to build Christlike characters: that's not just revelatory, it also determines who stays the course. Names are sealed in the Book of Life as well as removed from it, in the process.
This should be a healthy discussion, for that character of faith as culmination of the gospel question (2 Thes 2:14) is disliked by the evangelical Adventists....
Posted By: Charity
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/06/06 04:16 PM
We see eye to eye on this pivitol point Colin.
Again, the main thing that we can learn about the investigative Judgement from the pioneers is that it is
both a review and is determinative. There is so much scriptural evidence to support our original position in the writings of Loughborough, Andrews, Bates, White, Cottrell, Edson and others that it is hard to know where to begin. And it comes across clearly as good news to them that judgement has begun with the house of God. I Peter 4:17.
But we can’t fault Kevin Ferris on his position too severely. He has backed up his position quite well with our own statement of belief. This should cause us to go back and compare belief 24 with what the pioneers actually taught. I’ll reproduce just one statement for now by Bates of dozens like it from Bates and from other pioneers:
quote:
The simultaneous sealing of the 144,000 will show such a clear development of Christian character in their lives and shining foreheads (or faces,) that it will be clearly understood that Jesus has redeemed them from all iniquity, by purifying “unto himself a pecurliar people, ZEALOUS OF GOOD WORKS.” (These good works, methinks, will be something more than simply saying we believe the Lord is coming.) Yes, says Malachi, when by his prophetic spirit, he saw Jesus ‘making up his jewels,’ at this point of time, then shall ye return and discern between the righteous and the wicked, . . . [Emphasis from the original]
From: The Doctrine of the Sanctuary, Dan and Rev Committee Vol 5. p.139 quoting Joseph Bates in a booklet called “A Vindication of the Seventh-day Sabbath . .
Friends, it is all about character development – afflicting ourselves in this great day as we stand in judgment before God. The plea of our hearts should be ‘God be merciful to me a sinner before your holy law.’ This is the earthly aspect of the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary, and the good news is that Christ by his blood will empower all who understand both their own weakness and his strength and keeping power.
Posted By: Charity
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/06/06 04:31 PM
Above I said that we should go back to see what the pioneers originally taught. Most people do not have those resources available at their fingertips, but we all have ready access to the SOP writings. There are about 10 chapters in the Great Controversy that give an accurate history of the development of the sanctuary doctrine and its current application. If nothing else, every Adventist that is able should do a study of those chapters and note the additional important information that is not covered in belief 24.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/07/06 07:41 AM
The way we live our lives, the characters we develop, is what determines our eternal reward and destiny in judgment. During judgment, Jesus merely reveals our destiny, He does not determine it.
ED 109
The harvest of life is character, and it is this that determines destiny, both for this life and for the life to come. {Ed 108.2}
COL 74
He will judge every man according to his words and his works. Profession is as nothing in the scale. It is character that decides destiny. {COL 74.4}
COL 310
It is while men are still dwelling upon the earth that the work of investigative judgment takes place in the courts of heaven. The lives of all His professed followers pass in review before God. All are examined according to the record of the books of heaven, and according to his deeds the destiny of each is forever fixed. {COL 310.2}
COL 356
Thus actions repeated form habits, habits form character, and by the character our destiny for time and for eternity is decided. {COL 356.}
COL 377, 378
"This do, and thou shalt live," Christ said. In His teaching He ever presented the law as a divine unity, showing that it is impossible to keep one precept and break another; for the same principle runs through all. Man's destiny will be determined by his obedience to the whole law. {COL 377.4}
4T 429
They can never be admitted into heaven, for all worthy of an entrance there will love order and respect discipline. The characters formed in this life will determine the future destiny. When Christ shall come, He will not change the character of any individual. {4T 429.2}
TM 429, 430
The deeds done today are transferred to the books of heaven, just as the features are transferred by the artist onto the polished plate. They will determine our destiny for eternity, for bliss or eternal loss and agonizing remorse. Character cannot be changed when Christ comes, nor just as a man is about to die. Character building must be done in this life. {TM 429.3}
Also, everyone, not just the 144,000, must have perfect characters in order to inherit eternal life in heaven and the New Earth.
CSW 112
In the word of God they are to learn that all who enter heaven must have a perfect character; for then they will meet their Lord in peace. {CSW 112.3}
TDG 204
Christ did not leave this world until He had made it possible for every soul to live a life of perfect faith and obedience, to have a perfect character. {TDG 204.3}
UL 184
Christ came to the earth to give to men the pattern of the perfect character that all must obtain who would be welcomed to the future heavenly world. He found His pleasure in unwearied works for the good of men. His object in coming to our world was to leave an example of what the human character must become in order to be fitted for the society of heaven. {UL 184.5}
Posted By: Colin
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/07/06 02:17 AM
quote:
The way we live our lives, the characters we develop, is what determines our eternal reward and destiny in judgment. During judgment, Jesus merely reveals our destiny, He does not determine it.
How can we determine our destiny and Jesus not determine it as well, if we determine it with him??? ![[Confused]](images/icons/confused.gif)
The entire situation determines our sealing, not just revealing it!
Must be remembered of course that this "determination" is finishing a character, and not merely qualifying for heaven. It is Christ's character he fashions in us, and thus he is the determiner of our revealed character. It never was purely revealing the result that the judgement was about, but developing and determining the result as well....else there would be no result! ![[Big Grin]](images/icons/grin.gif)
We do need to tie this down the pioneer writings and any others since then that explain it. Apart from Andreason's The Sanctuary Service and Douglass' Why Jesus Waits, what else modern is there?
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/08/06 07:12 AM
quote:
Also, everyone, not just the 144,000, must have perfect characters in order to inherit eternal life in heaven and the New Earth.
Character perfection is not unique to the 144,000. The only thing different about them is they are translated alive after having endured LDEs. Everyone going to heaven, whether resurrected or translated, must have perfect characters. Some will be more mature than others, but none will have defective traits of character.
Obviously, therefore, character perfection is something we receive, rather than something we achieve. Everyone receives the gift of character perfection the moment they are born again. It comes complete with the mind of the new man, a gift God implants within us the moment we're reborn.
The only difference between the people taken to heaven is moral maturity. Everyone advances and matures at different rates. This will be true throughout the ceaseless ages of eternity. The difference is not measured in degrees of sin, but rather in depth of righteousness. We start off like candle light, and our eternal goal is to shine like sunlight, like Jesus. But eternity isn't long to exhaust our potential to shine more and more unto the perfect day.
ML 250
"The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul." Through obedience comes sanctification of body, soul, and spirit. This sanctification is a progressive work, and an advance from one stage of perfection to another. {ML 250.4}
COL 65
At every stage of development our life may be perfect; yet if God’s purpose for us is fulfilled, there will also be continual advancement. {COL 65}
1T 340
Even the most perfect Christian may increase continually in the knowledge and love of God. {1T 340}
HP 186
It is your work to advance toward perfection, making constant improvement, until at last you are pronounced worthy to receive immortal life. And even then the work of progression will not cease, but will continue throughout eternity. {HP 186.6}
Posted By: Charity
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/08/06 01:04 AM
Good quotes MM.
Colin, here is a bit more from the pioneers:
Not too many months ago we were discussing the impact of the book Questions on Doctrine on two or more other threads. Here is a statement from the book The Doctrine of the Sanctuary on the contrast between the teaching of the pioneers on the atonement and the teaching in QOD.
quote:
Today Seventh-day Adventists do teach that complete sacrificial atonement was made at the cross (see Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrines [Washington DC] 1957 pp. 349-55). But our pioneers did not generally believe that atonement was made at the cross. Uriah Smith emphatically stated their consensus in his book Looking Unto Jesus when he wrote that “Christ did not make the atonement when He shed his blood on the cross. Let this fact be fixed forever in the mind. ([Battle Creek MI 1898] p 237). JH Waggoner expressed the same view when he wrote “there is a clear distinction between the death of Christ and the atonement”. ([Battle Creek MI 1872] p 110). Doctrine of the Sanctuary, Page 201 footnote 17.
QOD supported its position with one or more quotes from Ellen White, but if you look at these, it seems clear that Ellen White shared the view of the pioneers. When she refers to Christ taking His blood into heaven when He ascended, and made atonement there after raising from the dead she is consistent with scripture that atonement is always and only accomplished by the application of the blood of the sacrifice, never by the act of sacrifice itself. The sacrifical act makes the blood available, but blood is the only agent that atones and atonement is only accomplished when it is applied. So today, in the Day of Atonement, it is the application of the Saviors blood that is our only hope. In the judgement it is the remedy applied to our souls.
Posted By: Colin
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/11/06 02:23 PM
Yes, the judgement is Jesus atoning for us in his sanctuary ministry: his blood applied to the mercy seat completely to reconcile us to God in life and character, having renewed the mind already. He likely doesn't exhibit his actual shed blood, but rather holds up his pierced hands, while the ark of the covenant's mercy seat represents his very person, opening the way to God's presence as he does.
That the judgement is making the final atonement for those living today - the deceased having their faith merely confirmed (i.e. Vandeman's incorrectly reduced stonement for the death and the living), Christ's ministry is determinative and revelatory of the Christ-like character of his people.
Posted By: Charity
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 01/12/06 03:56 AM
My brother commented one time that he understood better when he was a child why blood equals life in the Bible. As an adult he found it harder to grasp!
I'm surprized and frankly somewhat troubled that there is not much more participation on this topic. It is vital. The mighty angel of Revelation 18 was depicted to Ellen White as pointing to the sanctuary.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: The Sanctuary Doctrine Re-examined. - 06/30/08 01:20 AM
Bumping what I thought was an important topic back then, which is why I am wondering why it stopped dead in its tracks?