The Sanctuary Study Pt. 16

Our Sanctuary Study -- Continues
Light From the Throne -- Part 3 William Grotheer --
-- DANIEL SEVEN -- The seventh chapter of Daniel sheds light upon the final atonement when we relate it to the shadowy type of Leviticus 16, and helps us to see where we are in the progression of that Heavenly judgment.
This key prophecy above all others in Daniel, gives us a sequence of symbols and imagery by which we can identify in history the "little horn."
The attack on this prophecy today in the form of prophetic speculation is reprehensible. For individuals to profess "historic" Adventism, to promote the sales of "Spirit of Prophecy" books, such as Great Controversy, and then to undermine the force of this God-given prophecy in Daniel is to reveal themselves as the "agents" of Satan.
Those who promote such "agents" have themselves become instruments of the evil one to confuse God's professed people.
Daniel , in a night vision saw four beasts arise in succession from the sea "diverse one from another." (7:2-3)
{7:2} Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night,and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon thegreat sea. {7:3} And four great beasts came up from the sea,diverse one from another. {7:4} The first [was] like a lion,and had eagle's wings: I beheld till the wings thereof wereplucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made standupon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it
The first was "like a lion,, and had eagle's wings." (7:4) The identity of this beast, as can be shown both by Scripture and archeology, is Babylon.
Jeremiah, a contemporary of both Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, used this same symbolism in describing Babylon's king. (Jer. 49:19, 22, 28)
{49:19}Behold, he shall come up like a lion from the swelling ofJordan against the habitation of the strong: but I willsuddenly make him run away from her: and who [is] achosen [man, that] I may appoint over her? for who [is] likeme? and who will appoint me the time? and who [is] thatshepherd that will stand before me?
{49:22} Behold, he shall come up and fly as theeagle, and spread his wings over Bozrah: and at that dayshall the heart of the mighty men of Edom be as the heart ofa woman in her pangs.
{49:28} Concerning Kedar, and concerning the kingdomsof Hazor, which Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon shallsmite, thus saith the LORD; Arise ye, go up to Kedar, andspoil the men of the east.
The lion was followed by the bear, leopard, and the non-descript beast.
Out of the last beast with ten horns arose another "little horn" who plucked up three of the ten.
It had the eyes of a man, and spake "great things." (7:8)
{7:8} I considered the horns, and,behold, there came up among them another little horn,before whom there were three of the first horns plucked upby the roots: and, behold, in this horn [were] eyes like theeyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
It must be kept in mind that this "horn" never existed apart from the beast out which it arose. Its life and source of being was ever rooted in the non-descript beast.
The Powers which in succession followed Babylon were Medo-Persia, Grecia and Rome. Out of Rome and in the midst of the invading peoples who occupied the Roman Empire, there arose that unique power called the Papacy. It was to continue for "a time and times, and the dividing of time." (7:25)
{7:25} And he shall speak [great] words against themost High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High,and think to change times and laws: and they shall be giveninto his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.
This would bring the sequence of the symbols as seen by Daniel down to 1798 A.D.
From the earthly march of nations, Daniel's attention was then turned to the heavenly. He wrote - "I watched until the thrones were set up, and the Ancient of Days sat ... the court was set and the books were opened. " (7:9-10 Heb.)
{7:9} I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and theAncient of days did sit, whose garment [was] white assnow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne[was like] the fiery flame, [and] his wheels [as] burning fire.{7:10} A fiery stream issued and came forth from beforehim: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and tenthousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgmentwas set, and the books were opened.
In the sequence of this prophecy, this "judgment scene" would follow 1798, and it did according to the next prophetic vision given to Daniel, in 1844.
(8:14)
{8:14} And he said untome, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shallthe sanctuary be cleansed.
But the setting of the judgment did not conclude the night of vision of Daniel 7. Two more events followed in the vision. He "beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake." He continued to see the history of the little horn "till" the beast [which nourished the horn] was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame." (7:11)
{7:11} I beheld thenbecause of the voice of the great words which the hornspake: I beheld [even] till the beast was slain, and his bodydestroyed, and given to the burning flame.
Before considering the "great words" which the horn spoke after 1844, we should note the comparative prophecy in Rev. 19:20, where the beast, also non-descript, (13:2) is with "the false prophet," cast alive into "a lake of fire."
{13:2} And the beast which I sawwas like unto a leopard, and his feet were as [the feet] of abear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragongave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
Then follows the 1000 years and the judgment of the Great White Throne, before whom the "dead" [the lost] stand as individuals. (20:11-12)
{20:11} And I saw a great white throne, and him that saton it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away;and there was found no place for them. {20:12} And I sawthe dead, small and great, stand before God; and the bookswere opened: and another book was opened, which is [thebook] of life: and the dead were judged out of those thingswhich were written in the books, according to their works.
Corporate bodies of earth through which Satan worked during time cease at the Second Advent. Following the 1000 years, the Devil no longer operating through "agents" leads the host of the lost in the final confrontation. (20:8)
{20:8} And shall go out to deceivethe nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gogand Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number ofwhom [is] as the sand of the sea.
Now we return to a consideration of the "great words" which the "horn" spake after 1844.
In 1854, the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception was promulgated. This fact assures us that in the final conflict the doctrine of the Incarnation will play a vital role. In 1870, the Dogma of Papal Infallibility was affirmed by Vatican Council I. The issue of "authority" and what is true "authority" cannot be treated lightly in the end-time. Then in 1950, Pius XII made official dogma for the Catholic Church the teaching that Mary was received bodily into Heaven.
In the prophetic sequence of Daniel 7, after Daniel hears the "great words," he sees "one like unto the Son of man" coming not to earth, but to the Ancient of Days to receive "dominion, and glory, and a kingdom" made up of "the saints of the most High.". (7:13-14, 18)
{7:13} I saw in the night visions, and, behold, [one]like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, andcame to the Ancient of days, and they brought him nearbefore him. {7:14} And there was given him dominion, andglory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, andlanguages, should serve him: his dominion [is] aneverlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and hiskingdom [that] which shall not be destroyed.
{7:18} But the saints of the most High shall takethe kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even forever and ever.
In this same night vision, Daniel was told that the Judgment renders a decision in favor of the "saints of the most High," and the time came for them to possess the kingdom. (7:22)
{7:22} Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment wasgiven to the saints of the most High; and the time came thatthe saints possessed the kingdom.
Further, when the judgment shall sit, one of its objectives was to take away "the dominion" of the horn, and "to consume and destroy it unto the end." (7:26)
{7:26} But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take awayhis dominion, to consume and to destroy [it] unto the end.
How shall we harmonize the shadowy type of Leviticus 16, and the prophetic sequence of Daniel 7?
On the typical Day of Atonement, the first entry of blood into the Most Holy Place was by the High Priest, not only for himself, but "for his house." (16:11)
Then came the blood of the Lord's goat by the same High Priest. This was defined as necessary "because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins." (16:16) But the "uncleanness" was not cleansed until the final act at the Altar in the court where both the blood of the bullock and goat were mingled.
It was at this Altar that the daily service for the individual provided forgiveness because through the blood of the sin offering confession was made, and the fact that the penalty had been paid was recorded by the placing of the blood on the horns of that Altar.
The prophetic symbolism of Daniel 7 fits the picture of Christ coming to the Ancient of Days having completed the cleansing of the "saints" of their uncleanness. Thus the "saints" can possess the Kingdom through "the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" - God's grace in providing it, and Jesus' willingness, as Isaac's, to be "the propitiation." (Rom. 3:24-25)
The "great words" which began with a dogma concerning Mary, closed with a dogma concerning her in 1950. The events - both secular and within the Church - which took place at that date and since, take on a new significance for those who wish to walk in the light from the Throne. ( I John 1:7)
{1:7} But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, wehave fellowship one with another, and the blood of JesusChrist his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
Consider the following data, now a matter of history. The World Council of Churches was formed in 1948. Israel was re-established a State the same year. An 1949, Bible Readings for the Home Circle was revised, and the doctrine of the Incarnation was the first doctrine to be altered. It was followed by other doctrinal changes in succeeding decades culminating in the adoption of the 27 Fundamental Statements of Belief in 1980. In 1950, Wieland and Short made their original presentation to the General Conference on the infiltration of Baal worship into the Seventh-day Adventist Church. (See original manuscript - 1888 Re-Examined as reproduced in A Warning and Its Reception.) In 1952, a world-wide Bible Conference held in the Sligo Park Church discussed the significance of Luke 21:24. It has since been fulfilled. (See manuscript - The Times of the Gentiles Fulfilled.) All of this must now be understood and harmonized for the time has come for the saints to possess the kingdom. "The hour has come, the hour is striking, and striking at you, the hour and the end!" (Eze. 7:6-7 Moffatt)
*******
We're going to pause here.
History and Biblical prophecy going hand in hand. The type mirroring the true in a shadowy way. We can see this we can with the Holy Spirit's guidance come to understand all of this.
People don't like to hear words like judgment, punishment, endings. People want to believe that they won't *really* be judged, that punishment won't follow judgment, that there will be an end to all things. It's much easier to just look away from it all and believe it's not true because then they can live without worry of an ultimate ending to their lives. Here and now is all there is, so that's the way it is. That belief might satisfy a lot of people, but it doesn't satisfy me. I refuse to believe this world is all there is. That it created itself over time and when your brief life span is up that's it, you no longer exist. No, I don't want to believe that. I can't believe it.
I believe in God. I believe in the Bible. I believe in Jesus as my Savior.
I believe we are given instructions and we need to study to understand.
In type God's chosen were given the sanctuary and all its services. In reality the sanctuary pointed to Jesus, the savior, the redeemer. The sanctuary was an example of the heavenly, and yes, I believe there is a heavenly sanctuary not made with hands.
Heb. {9:11} But Christ beingcome an high priest of good things to come, by a greaterand more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is tosay, not of this building; {9:12} Neither by the blood ofgoats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in onceinto the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption [forus. ]
May God bless us as we continue to study-
2 Tim. {2:15} Study to shew thyself approved unto God, aworkman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividingthe word of truth.
By the Grace and Mercy of our Lord and Savior, in the name of Jesus, God's only Son we ask this.
Amen.

The Sanctuary Study Pt. 15

Sanctuary Study Continued--
1989 Special 3 -- Light From the Throne -- Part 3 -- EDITORIAL (William Grotheer)-- If you do not wish to think new concepts based on fundamentals of truth, then read no further. Either put the paper away until you are willing to do so, or throw it immediately into "File 13."
Whether we want to admit it or not, we do have problems with the sanctuary doctrine.
Many, too many, have discarded the teaching altogether, accepting Barnhouse's evaluation that it "is the most colossal, psychological, face-saving phenomenon in religious history." (See Manuscript - The Seventh-day Adventist-Evangelical Conferences of 1955-1956)
Those who recognize that there are problems, but perceive the sanctuary truth to be light from the Throne of God can do one of two things:
1) Ignore the problem and put their heads in the sand; or 2) Face the problem and offer a solution, refining their concepts.
-The rest will continue in their blind traditionalism.
Several years ago, I was invited through the instrumentality of a young couple to speak at a church gathering here in Arkansas made up of a group of people dedicated to what became known as the "new theology."
In discussing the agreed to subject on the sanctuary and the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14, it was anticipated by the group leaders that I would use nothing but the Writings. This I did not do. After reading from the Writings the place of the Sanctuary doctrine and Daniel 8:14 in the original Adventist theology, I proceeded to give the Bible basis for that faith.
When I finished, one young lady on the front row exclaimed - "I do not have to give up my belief in the sanctuary, I can now believe it from the Bible."
Not all shared that new found joy, and some of the local leaders ranted and raved referring to Crosier's apostasy, but they could not refute the Word of God.
This brings us to another grave, but fundamental question. What do we do with the Writings in regard to the Sanctuary teaching?
There are those, who if one does not accept the Writings of Ellen G. White as infallible, are willing to spread the propaganda that that one does not believe in Ellen G. White.
First, one must understand that there is only One in whom one must "believe" for salvation, and that is the Lord Jesus Christ - no human being!
Secondly, one must realize that to recognize that the Writings of Ellen G. White are not infallible is to accept her own testimony.
She wrote: In regard to infallibility, I never claimed it; God alone is infallable. His word is true, and in Him is no variableness, or shadow of turning. (Letter 10, 1895; quoted in SM, bk. i , p. 37)
We compound our problem when we do not recognize the difference between "impeccable" and "infallible."
Ellen G. White never even intimated that she was impeccable, for she recognized that she along with the rest of us were sinning, erring mortals. She also did not claim "infallibility" which means "incapable of error: unerring (in memory); sure, certain (in remedy);" and "incapable of error in defining doctrines touching faith or morals" (Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary).
Further, she emphatically taught in the book, Great Controversy, that because there is a widespread departure from the doctrines and teachings of the Scriptures, "there is need of a return to the great Protestant principle, - the Bible and the Bible only, as the rule of faith and duty."(pp. 204-205)
Then she told why this is essential: - "Satan's manner of working against God and His word has not changed; he is still as much opposed to the Scriptures being made the guide of life as in the sixteenth century." Today the enemy has produced a masterpiece of deception. He has taken the works of the "messenger of the Lord" and led the professed people of God to accept them as an infallible substitute for the Bible.
We need to go one step further. We have this councel in regard to doctrinal unity: We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they well never have to give up a cherished view, never have an occasion to change an opinion will be disappointed. (TM, p. 30)
In college, the professor to New Testament Greek used to quote this reference frequently when we were reading the text. It would wrankle me no end. I thought him to be a heretic. But today in retrospect, he was my best Bible teacher on the undergraduate level. He taught me to do in thinking and study what Jesus told the disciples to do in fishing - "Launch out into the deep." We have been doing too much "surface" studying of the Word of God. We have been advised: We do not go deep enough in our search for truth... God wants our minds to expand. (TM, p. 119; read whole page)
This is what the current issue of the Commentary is all about. If you wish to explore with me some questions and expand your thinking, then with your Bibles open, begin reading this issue.
-- Light From the Throne -- Part 3 --
In beginning the study of the services of the Day of Atonement, we need first to outline in detail what was done under the shadowy services of the type.
The instruction found in Leviticus 16 followed closely after the death of Aaron's two sons who "offered strange- fire before the Lord." "(Lev. 10:1; 16;1)
{10:1} And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, tookeither of them his censer, and put fire therein, and putincense thereon, and offered strange fire before the LORD,which he commanded them not
(16:1) And the LORD spake unto Moses after the deathof the two sons of Aaron, when they offered before theLORD, and died;
Even Aaron, the High Priest, was not to come "at all times into the holy place within the vail before the mercy seat,which is upon the ark." (16:2)
{16:2} And the LORD said unto Moses,Speak unto Aaron thy brother, that he come not at all timesinto the holy [place] within the vail before the mercy seat,which [is] upon the ark; that he die not: for I will appear inthe cloud upon the mercy seat.
(You will observe that in the KJV the word, "place," is in italics, being supplied. In the Hebrew, the word is kodesh, the same word as used in Psalm 77:13 - "Thy way, 0 God, is in the sanctuary (kodesh). The LXX uses the Greek word, to hagion, the same as is used in Hebrews 9:1, and translated "sanctuary." However, in Leviticus 16, it is clearly defined as to its application the second apartment or most holy place of the sanctuary.)
When Aaron was to come into the most holy place on the Day of Atonement, he was to bring a young bullock for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering. (16:3)
{16:3} Thus shall Aaroncome into the holy [place:] with a young bullock for a sinoffering, and a ram for a burnt offering.
The "bullock" was to be "for himself, and for his house." (16:11)
{16:11} And Aaron shallbring the bullock of the sin offering, which [is] for himself,and shall make an atonement for himself, and for his house,and shall kill the bullock of the sin offering which [is] forhimself:
But no hands were laid upon the head of this bullock in either confession or transference, yet it was called a "sin offering." One might reply that because this was a sin offering, the law of the sin offering required that this be done. No blood carrying the confession of sin could cleanse, and in the final step of the cleansing the cleansing of the Altar of the Court the blood of the bullock was mingled with the blood of the Lord's goat. (16:18)
{16:18} And he shall go out unto thealtar that [is] before the LORD, and make an atonement forit; and shall take of the blood of the bullock, and of theblood of the goat, and put [it] upon the horns of the altarround about.
On the Day of Atonement, throughout the ministry of cleansing, Aaron was to wear the "holy garments" made of linen. (16:4)
{16:4} He shall puton the holy linen coat, and he shall have the linen breechesupon his flesh, and shall be girded with a linen girdle, andwith the linen mitre shall he be attired: these [are] holygarments; therefore shall he wash his flesh in water, and[so] put them on.
These were not removed until he had finished the whole ritual of the day up to and including the transfer of sin to the head of the live goat. (16:23)
{16:23} And Aaron shall come into the tabernacle of thecongregation, and shall put off the linen garments, which heput on when he went into the holy [place,] and shall leavethem there
Two kids of goats were taken from the congregation, and were presented before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle. (16:7)
{16:7} And he shall take the two goats, andpresent them before the LORD [at] the door of thetabernacle of the congregation
Over these, lots were cast, one goat becoming the Lord's goat, and the other for Azazel, or the scapegoat. A comment found in Keil Delitzsch explains well the significance of "one lot for the Lord, and the other lot for the scapegoat" (Heb. - Azazel; 16:8, margin)
{16:8} And Aaron shall castlots upon the two goats; one lot for the LORD, and the otherlot for the scapegoat
It reads:
The words, one lot for Jehovah and one for Azazel, require unconditionally that Azazel should be regarded as a personal being in apposition to Jehovah ... We have not to think, however, of any demon, who seduces men to wickedness in the form of an evil spirit, as the fallen angel Azazel is represented as doing in Jewish writings ..., like the terrible fiend Shibe, whom the Arabs of the peninsula of Sinai so much dread ..., but of the devil himself, the head of the fallen angels, who was afterwards called Satan; for no subordinate evil spirit could have been placed in antithesis to Jehovah as Azazel is here, but only the ruler or head of the kingdom of demons. (Vol. 1, p. 398)
Three times Aaron enters the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement. First to burn incense, so that "a cloud of incense may cover the mercy seat that is upon the testimony." (16:12-13)
{16:12} And he shall take a censer full of burningcoals of fire from off the altar before the LORD, and hishands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring [it]within the vail: {16:13} And he shall put the incense uponthe fire before the LORD, that the cloud of the incense maycover the mercy seat that [is] upon the testimony, that he dienot:
Next he brings the blood of the bullock, and sprinkles it seven times before the ark. (16:14)
{16:14} And he shall take of the blood of the bullock,and sprinkle [it] with his finger upon the mercy seateastward; and before the mercy seat shall he sprinkle of theblood with his finger seven times
Finally the blood of the Lord's goat is brought in and the same procedure is followed as for the blood of the bullock. (16:15)
{16:15} Then shall he kill the goat of the sin offering, that[is] for the people, and bring his blood within the vail, anddo with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock,and sprinkle it upon the mercy seat, and before the mercyseat:
Then the text reads:
He shall make an atonement for the holy place [most holy], because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins. (16:16)
{16:16} And he shall make an atonement for the holy[place,] because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel,and because of their transgressions in all their sins: and soshall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation, thatremaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness
Here we must pause and do some thinking.
If in fact, the blood of the sin offerings represented the transference of sin to the sanctuary, how did the sin get into the Most Holy Place, inasmuch as no blood was ever taken into that Most Holy Place during the year?
Further, none of the blood on the Day of Atonement which was taken in was laden with sin.
The truth is, the record of the sins of Israel were already recorded there, and the blood of the sin offerings merely indicated that the penalty had been paid for a life had been given.
Now the record had to be expunged, and the final penalty for sin adjudicated. But along with sin is introduced the "uncleanness of the children of Israel." This facet enters the ritual services again as the cleansing continues. While the record of the sins and transgressions could be expunged in the Most Holy Place, the uncleanness could not.
The question remains - what does this phase of the cleansing mean? This must be addressed, and this we shall do as the study continues.
Following the cleansing of the Most Holy Place, the High Priest also cleansed the holy place, or first apartment, noted as "the tabernacle." (16:16)
{16:16} And he shall make an atonement for the holy[place,] because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel,and because of their transgressions in all their sins: and soshall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation, thatremaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness
This was performed because of the record placed on the horns of the Altar of Incense. The instruction read: And Aaron shall make an atonement upon the horns of it [Altar of Incense] once in a year with the blood of the sin offering of atonements. (Ex. 30:10)
{30:10} And Aaron shall make an atonement upon thehorns of it once in a year with the blood of the sin offeringof atonements: once in the year shall he make atonementupon it throughout your generations: it [is] most holy untothe LORD.
It must be kept in mind that on this Altar during the year was recorded only the blood of corporate confession.
Then Aaron went to the Court. (16:18)
{16:18} And he shall go out unto thealtar that [is] before the LORD, and make an atonement forit; and shall take of the blood of the bullock, and of theblood of the goat, and put [it] upon the horns of the altarround about.
Here the blood of the bullock and the blood of the Lord's goat were mingled for the cleansing of the Alter of Burnt Offering. Two things should be observed:
1) This Altar carried the record of the confessed sins of the individual, and the fact that the penalty had been paid. And 2) Only the uncleanness of the children of Israel is mentioned in this cleansing, not their sins. (16:19)
After Aaron had "made an end of reconciling the [most] holy place, and the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar" (16:20),
{16:20} And when he hath made an end of reconciling theholy [place,] and the tabernacle of the congregation, and thealtar, he shall bring the live goat:
... then the live goat entered the picture. On him the High Priest placed "both" of his hands and "confessed" over the goat "all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins."
{16:21} And Aaron shalllay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, andconfess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel,and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting themupon the head of the goat, and shall send [him] away by thehand of a fit man into the wilderness:
(16:21) This goat was then dispatched by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness, to "a land not inhabited." (16:22)
{16:22} And the goatshall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land notinhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness
Again it should be observed that the uncleanness of the children of Israel was not included, only that which had been adjudicated in the Most Holy Place. The cleansing of the uncleanness ended at the Altar of the court.
It is well to note in passing that after Aaron had assumed his official attire, he offered his burnt offering, and a sin offering for the congregation, thus bringing the blood of confession once again into the sanctuary. (Cmp. Lev. 16:24 & Num. 29:11) The new year had begun and with it came the same round of services which could not make the comer there unto perfect. It was but shadowy. The Reality to which it pointed could and would accomplish the objective of God and the longing of the contrite soul.
OTHER ASPECTS AND QUESTIONS --
The Day of Atonement was more sacred than a regular Sabbath. It is called a "Sabbath of sabbaths." (Lev. 23:32, Heb. )
{23:32} It [shall be] untoyou a sabbath of rest, and ye shall afflict your souls: in theninth [day] of the month at even, from even unto even, shallye celebrate your sabbath.
"All the various elements effecting atonement are in a marked degree combined in the Day of Atonement ... It is called - 'shabbat shabbaton,' the holiest of rest days." (Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. II, p. 280; quoted in Messiah in His Sanctuary, p. 67) On this day, as on the weekly Sabbath, no work was to be done, while on the other feast days, "servile work" - the performance of a trade - alone was prohibited. (Lev. 23:28, cmp. with 23:7) It was to be fast day, a day for soul affliction. It was called "the fast" by Luke. (Acts 27:9, margin)
The blood of the Lord's goat is noted in Scripture as "the sin offering of atonements" (Ex. 30:10)
{30:10} And Aaron shall make an atonement upon thehorns of it once in a year with the blood of the sin offeringof atonements: once in the year shall he make atonementupon it throughout your generations: it [is] most holy untothe LORD.
The same emphasis is to be found in Leviticus 23, though not apparent in the KJV. Literally, the record reads: "On the tenth of this seventh month is a day of atonements ... and ye shall do no work in this same day: for it is a day of atonements, to make an atonement for you." (27-28)
This day called for soul affliction, fasting and no work. In contemplating the significance of these requirements, it would be well to ponder the message of Isaiah 58:1-7.
{58:1} Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like atrumpet, and shew my people their transgression, and thehouse of Jacob their sins. {58:2} Yet they seek me daily,and delight to know my ways, as a nation that didrighteousness, and forsook not the ordinance of their God:they ask of me the ordinances of justice; they take delight inapproaching to God.{58:3} Wherefore have we fasted, [say they,] and thouseest not? [wherefore] have we afflicted our soul, and thoutakest no knowledge? Behold, in the day of your fast ye findpleasure, and exact all your labours. {58:4} Behold, ye fastfor strife and debate, and to smite with the fist ofwickedness: ye shall not fast as [ye do this] day, to makeyour voice to be heard on high. {58:5} Is it such a fast that Ihave chosen? a day for a man to afflict his soul? [is it] tobow down his head as a bulrush, and to spread sackclothand ashes [under him?] wilt thou call this a fast, and anacceptable day to the LORD? {58:6} [Is] not this the fastthat I have chosen? to loose the bands of wickedness, toundo the heavy burdens, and to let the oppressed go free,and that ye break every yoke? {58:7} [Is it] not to deal thybread to the hungry, and that thou bring the poor that arecast out to thy house? when thou seest the naked, that thoucover him; and that thou hide not thyself from thine ownflesh?
An observation worthy of much thought is to be found in the chapter. "The Seal of God." (Testimonies, Vol.5) It reads: In the time when (God's) wrath shall go forth in judgments, ["the little company who are standing in the light", the] humble devoted followers of Christ will be distinguished from the rest of the world by their soul-anguish, which will be expressed in lamentation and weeping, reproofs and warnings. (p.210)
The Day of Atonement cannot be disassociated from the concept of the sealing. The modern orthodox Jews in their celebration of The Day, pray during its closing hours the following prayer: Our Father, our King, seal our name in the book of life; our Father, our King, seal our name in the book of remembrance; our Father, our King, seal our name in the book of success and prosperity. ("Prayers for the Day of Atonement" quoted in Messiah in His Sanctuary, p. 69)
The Jewish Encyclopedia contributes to this concept: Down to the first century, the idea of the divine judgment was mainly eschatological in character, as deciding the destiny of the soul after death rather than of men on earth. But ... the idea developed also in Jewish circles that on the first of Tishri [the seventh month] the sacred New Year's Day, ...man's doings were judged and his destiny decided; and on the tenth of Tishri [the Day of Atonement] the decree of Heaven was sealed. (Vol. II, p. 281)
F. C. Gilbert after quoting the above reference comments: The belief in the sealing work on this most holy day has been prevalent and accepted among the seed of Abraham for many centuries. This idea is found in their literature through the ages. (Messiah in His Sanctuary, p. 71)
The relationship between the Day of Atonement and the Sealing work is further suggested by the vestments worn by the High Priest while ministering the atonement. The High Priest was to put on what is called "the holy linen garments." (See Lev. 15:4) In Ezekiel 9, the one who is commanded to "mark a mark" in the foreheads of the men "that sigh and cry" is designated as "the man clothed in linen."
{9:2} And, behold, six men came from the way of thehigher gate, which lieth toward the north, and every man aslaughter weapon in his hand; and one man among them[was] clothed with linen, with a writer's inkhorn by his side:and they went in, and stood beside the brasen altar.
(9:2; 10:2)
{10:2} And he spake unto the manclothed with linen, and said, Go in between the wheels,[even] under the cherub, and fill thine hand with coals offire from between the cherubims, and scatter [them] overthe city. And he went in in my sight.
In detailing the ritual for the Day of Atonement, we observed that when the cleansing process reached the Altar of the Court, only the "uncleanness" of the children of Israel was cleansed. This was accomplished with the High Priest "for himself and his house" and the blood of the Lord's goat. In this shadowy type, it must be kept in mind that the High Priest was prefiguring the work of Christ the Great High Priest.
The book of Hebrews tells us that Christ is "a son over His own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end." (Heb 3:6)
One must ask himself if the final cleansing at the Altar in the court was a prefiguring of the prophetic utterances found in Zephaniah 3:13
{3:13} The remnant of Israel shall not do iniquity, norspeak lies; neither shall a deceitful tongue be found in theirmouth: for they shall feed and lie down, and none shallmake [them] afraid
and Revelation 14:5.
{14:5} And in their mouth was found noguile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.
The prophecy of Zechariah 3, also enters the picture. Here in symbolism, Joshua is clothed in filthy (unclean) garments.
But Joshua does not remove them. They are removed by the attendants of the "Angel of the Lord."
Then this "Angel" declares - "Behold I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with a change of raiment." (3:4) No work was to be done on the Day of Atonement; neither did Joshua work in the removal of the filthy garments.
His part in this transaction was to consent - surrender to the Divine objective.
If there is, as it appears, a connection between the ministry at the Altar in the Court on the Day of Atonement and these prophecies noted above, then we must develop with caution the conclusion to be drawn.
Zephaniah says "the remnant of Israel shall do no iniquity" and the removal of "a deceitful tongue" finds its echo in Revelation 14:5.
But to interpret the cleansing of "the uncleanness" - the taking away of the filthy garment - as the removal of the fallen nature would invoke the theology of the Holy Flesh Movement. But then, if as is prefigured in the type, the cleansing of the record of sin and iniquity is accomplished in the Most Holy Place, then what does this "uncleanness" represent and when will it be done?
Over this point much prayerful study must be made and conclusions drawn only as light comes from the Throne.
*******
There is so much here to learn, so much to comprehend.
We can blow it off as something that is boring, that doesn't matter, the should be read and forgotten. We can not even read this, or we can read and scoff. In truth, seeking to understand the type, the shadow of what points to Jesus and has always pointed to Jesus is necessary to understand. We need to do all we can to understand the work of our Lord, yes, our savior. Is it enough to say that he's saved us and end it there? We have to continued to live beyond our initial acceptance, our initial repentance. We have to walk as Jesus walked, learn of all of Him that we can. There is no aspect of Jesus we are to set aside, we need to embrace all of him. He is revealed in the scriptures of old. He Himself tells us to search the scriptures.
John {5:39} Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye haveeternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
May God help us as we search the scriptures, as we study and learn and ask for the Holy Spirit to guide us to understand.
This isn't an easy study by far and it will take much prayer to truly understand.
We will keep on, we will keep studying and may the Lord bless and keep us in His truth now and always.
We need to understand.
By His Grace, by His Will.
Amen.

The Sanctuary Study Pt. 13

Our Sanctuary Study is continued.
We know that blood is shed for the remission of sins. Matt. {26:28}
In the Sanctuary service before Christ's ultimate sacrifice, an animal sacrifice was brought to the Sanctuary and sacrificed, it's blood shed. Let's pick up our study here--
1989 Special 2 -- Light From the Throne William Grotheer--
WHAT WAS TRANSFERRED? -- Basic to salvation is transferrence.
We cannot pay a penalty for our sins and live.
What, then, was transferred when in the sanctuary ritual, the sinner placed his hand upon the head of the sacrifice he brought to the door of the tabernacle?
This is no idle question.
It was over this question that E. J. Waggoner stumbled. A letter was found on his desk after his sudden death, May 28, 1916, which he wanted the one to whom it was written to consider it "as a confession of faith." In it he wrote: The self-evident truth that sin is not an entity but a condition that can exist only in a person, made it clear to me that it is impossible for there to be any such thing as the transferring of sins to the sanctuary in heaven, thus defiling that place; and that there could, consequently, be any such thing, either in 1844 A.D., or at any subsequent time, as the "cleansing of the sanctuary." (The Confession of Faith, p. 14)
It can be seen that the question as to what was transferred in the typical sanctuary ritual has been a source of contention in the teaching of the sanctuary truth.
Actually, there was and is no need for the transference of sin to the sanctuary, whether in type or Heavenly Reality.
As we noted in the previous Commentary , all sin the moment committed is recorded in "books", or in modern terminology, a "computer bank." (III-1, p. 6, col. 2) The very inferrence of the language used in outlining the sin offering ritual indicates the recording of the sin committed. The law reads - "If his sin, wherein he hath sinned, come to his knowledge." (Lev., 4:23, 28) The fact of sin preceded the perception of that sin. When perceived, it was not the recording of the sin that the sinner needed, but the means to escape from the penalty of the sin.
Review the steps outlined in the model for one category.
When the common person became conscious of his sin, he brought the designated animal.
Putting his hand upon the head of the victim, he confessed "that he hath sinned in that thing." (Lev. 5:5)
The sacrificial animal was "accepted for him to make an atonement for him." (Lev. 1:4)
What did the atonement require? Death!
Life had to be forfeited, for the wages of sin is death. (Rom. 6:23)
The sinner slew the animal.
The blood, which "is the life of all flesh" (Lev. 17:14), was taken by the priest and fingerprinted on the Altar in the court. This record is saying loud and clear, the penalty had been paid. Confession had been made; therefore, forgiveness can be extended to the transgressor.
This is exactly what the law of the sin offering stated - "and the priest shall make an atonement for him, and it shall be forgiven him." (4:31, 35) It does not say that the priest shall make an atonement for him and record his sin.
What salvation would that be?
"The offerer transferred the consciousness of sin and the desire for forgiveness to the head of the animal that had been brought in is stead, by the laying on of his hand; and after this the animal was slaughtered, and suffered death for him as the wages of sin." (Keil-Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, Vol. I, p. 305) Thus the record of sin already there is offset by the fact that thee penalty has been paid for by some other living creature.
THE LAW OF THE SIN OFFERING -- This is the law of the sin offering: In the place where the burnt offering is killed shall the sin offering be killed before the Lord: it is most holy.
The priest that offereth it shall eat it: in the holy place shall it be eaten, in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation. (Lev. 6:25-26)
So full of meaning was this law that when the sons of Aaron violated it, Moses beame "angry" with them. (Lev. 10:16) He asked emphatically - "Why have ye not eaten the sin offering in the holy place, for it is most holy, and He has given it to you to take away the iniquity of the congregation, to make atonement for them before Jehovah? Behold, its blood has not been brought into the holy place inside. You should certainly have eaten it in the holy place as I have commanded." (Lev. 10:17-18 Heb.)
The offering was a "goat," thus a sin offering for an individual. (Lev. 4:23,. 38) Such being the case, the common priest ministered the blood (4:25, 30), and because it was not brought into the sanctuary, he should have eaten of the sacrifice, so as to bear in himself the sin.
In the sin offerings over which the High Priest ministered, the blood was brought into the sanctuary. In this differentiation between the individual and corporate sins as to whom ministered, and what each category of ministering priests did, we see the dual role of Christ both as common priest, and as High Priest.
Every high priest was taken from among men (Heb. 5:1), so Christ to become the great High Priest had to become man.
In becoming man, He "partook of the same" flesh and blood as is common to humanity. (Heb. 2:14)
He "took upon Himself the slave-form of man" (Phil. 2:7, Gr.) coming in "the likeness of sinful flesh" (Rom. 8:3), being made "to be sin for us." (II Cor. 5:21) 'In His earthly ministry, Jesus was both "that prophet" (John 1: 21) , and "common priest. " As "that Prophet" He would "build the temple of the Lord" even as Moses the earthly type. As "the Common Priest," He "offered sacrifice, Himself the priest, Himself the victim." (See AA, p. 33) Ministering in the "court" of this earth, He bestowed "forgiveness" even as the common priests of Israel did upon the individual offerer. To the scribes and Pharisees who became incensed because He said to a palsy stricken man - "Thy sins are forgiven thee" - Jesus demonstrated "that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins" by telling the man, "Arise, and take up thy couch, and go into thine house." And he did! (Luke 5:18-24)
Here in the court of earth, the shadowy type was meeting "the very image" of the good things which it prefigured.
In ministering the law of the sin offering, the priest would "make atonement" for the sin which the individual "committed, and it [would] be forgiven him." (Lev. 4:35)
So Jesus the "anointed One" declared forgiveness to the sin-burdened souls who came to Him. Not only did He forgive sins, but He provided a "forgiveness of sins" which "justified from all things" beyond the scope of the shadowy "law of Moses." (Acts 13:38-39)
Having provided the sacrifice, He ministers, at the Throne of Grace ,mercy and grace to all who come boldly "in full assurance of faith." (Heb. 4:16; 10:22)
The earthly high priest ministered only corporate sin offerings wherein the blood was brought into the sanctuary, and thus did not eat of the offering partaking of its symbolic sin. Christ preserving the purity of His divine character, was called to be the High Priest after the Order of Melchisedec. In this mediatiorial work, He is not only "able to save to the uttermost" those who "come unto God by Him," but He is also "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens." (Heb. 7:2526)
In Christ, the law of the sin offering finds its reality, both in His work as a Common Priest while on earth, and in His work as High Priest in the Heavenly Sanctuary.
THE FAT OF THE SIN OFFERINGS -- Four times during the instruction of how the sin offerings were to be ministered, the Lord told Moses the fat was to be removed and burned "as the fat of the sacrifice of the peace offerings." (Lev. 4:10, 26, 31, 35) The peace offerings had been detailed just prior to the instruction concerning the sin offerings. (Lev. 3) All "the fat that covereth the inwards, ... and the two kidneys, and the fat that is upon them, which is by the flanks, and the caul (fold) above the liver ' with the kidneys, it shall [the priest] take away." (3:9-10) These were to be burned upon the altar.
The fat and the kidneys are declared to be "the food [Heb. - bread] of the offering made by fire for a sweet savour" unto the Lord. (Lev. 3:11, 16; 4:31) "All the fat" the Lord claimed as His, and with the blood, forbad that it should be eaten. (3:16-17)
What is the significance of this part of the ritual? What do the kidneys represent? What is the meaning of the fat and why is it cut away and burned?
First, the kidneys:
The kidneys "were regarded as the seat of the tenderest and deepest emotions." (Keil & Delitzsch, op cit., p. 306)Gesenius in his Hebrew lexicon states that the word for kidneys (k'layoth) was used metonymically to represent "the mind, soul as the seat of the desires, affections, passions," and is often coupled with "heart" (lev).
Observe closely the following texts. Note the use of the Hebrew word for "kidneys" as a figure of speech. In each instance, the word is translated "reins" in the KJV:
The righteous God trieth the hearts and reins. (Ps. 7:9)Examine me, 0 Lord, and prove me; try my reins and my heart. (Ps. 26:2)Thus was my heart grieved, and I was prickedin my reins. (Ps. 73:21)But, 0 Lord of hosts, that judgest righteously, that triest the reins and the heart. (Jer. 11:20)I the Lord search the heart, I try the reins, ... (Jer. 17:10)
How are we to understand this in relationship to the sin offering? God met Israel at the level of their perception.
The "seat of emotion, desires and passions" was removed from the body and burned on the altar. But before this could be done, the "fat" had to be stripped from the kidneys and also burned. The full comment found in Keil & Delitzsch is interesting. It reads: Now, if the flesh of the victim represented the body of the offerer as the organ of the soul, the fat portions inside the body, together with the kidneys, which were regarded as the seat of the tenderest and deepest emotions, can only have set forth the better part or inmost kernel of the man. (op. cit.)
While this comment relates the separation from the body of certain parts of the sin offering, and differentates between the "outer" and "inner man," it still leaves unexplained, why the fat had to be separated from the kidneys.
Paul addresses the "outer" and "inner" man concepts. He wrote, "For delight in the law of God after the inner man." (Rom. 7:22) To him, "though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day." (II Cor. 4:16) He explained how this could be. He wrote - "I die daily." (I Cor. 15:31) Self, "the reins," was crucified with Christ. (Gal. 2:20)
The kidneys were burned on the altar. Yet the offerer lived because he was forgiven.
In this service, the fat stripped from the inwards parts as well as the kidneys, was also burned.
Into "smoke" it was consumed away.
What does this mean, and what is this ritual saying to us?
In the Scriptures, the Hebrew word, "fat" (helev) was used to refer to the best, and most abundant.
Pharaoh offered Joseph for his family, the "good of the land of Egypt," and said that they "shall eat of the fat of the land." (Gen. 45:18)
But "fat" is also associated with disobedience, sins, and backsliding.
Observe the following texts:
Samuel said to Saul - "To obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams." (I Sam. 15:22) In this experience, the "fat" was substituted for obedience. To have followed fully the instruction God gave in reference to the Amalekites (15:3), there would have been no fat to offer.
God through Isaiah said of Israel - Thou hast not "filled me with the fat of thy sacrifices: but thou hast made me to serve with thy sins, thou hast wearied me with thine iniquities." Then God declared of Himself - "I, even I, am He that blotteth out thy transgressions for my own sake, and will not remember thy sins." (Isa. 43:24-25) How was this "blotting" out not symbolized by Israel? Israel had not brought the "fat of [the] sacrifices."
Ezekiel stated, of the priests who had charge of the sanctuary, that "when the children of Israel went astray" from God, they were to come near and offer to God "the fat and the blood." (Eze. 44:15)
It is objected that "fat" cannot be associated with sin because nothing which represented sin was permitted on the Altar of Burnt Offering. Besides, the offering of the fat of the sin offering was considered a "sweet savour unto the Lord." (Lev. 4:31) How then could this be associated with sin? It is further questioned, how can "fat," if it symbolized sin in any way, be considered as "the bread of the offering," and as being "the Lord's"? (See Lev. 3:11, 16)
In support of the first objection, the exclusion of "leaven," a symbol of sin, from the meal offering is cited. (Lev. 2:11) There is, however, a difference between leaven and fat. Leaven would be introduced into the meal, while fat is an integral part of the animal sacrifice. In the case of the individual sin offering, major parts of the sacrifical animal became the actual possession of the ministering priest. But in all instances, the fat was excluded, cut away, and burned.
The whole of the sin offering was considered "most holy" unto the Lord. (Lev. 6:25) Is it unreasonable to assume that any representation whereby sin is removed either from the sinner, or whereby provision is made for its extinction, that such a sacrifice would be as a "sweet savour" unto God?
The fat cannot be considered in the same category as the "kidney" as it was separated from it, even though both were burned. if the "kidney" stood for the very "reins" of the person, and was burned on the altar, is the concept of sin not introduced to the altar? Does not the Scripture teach that "the heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked"? (Jer. 17:9) Is not the significant meaning of this part of the ritual saying -
Since you have been forgiven; the wages of sin have been paid in the mediation of the blood; but to go and sin no more, excesses and abundance must be cut away. And the how is clearly indicated.
While the sinner slew the victim, taking its life, it was the priest who separated the fat from the kidneys and the inward parts.
The offerer could not do it, and not until he died symbolically in the sacrifice could the priest do it!
How does this pertain to the Reality?
We must be crucified with Christ.
Then living by the faith of the Son of God," we are "strengthened with might by His Spirit in the inner man." (Gal. 2:20; Eph. 4:16)
The excesses of life are cut away; the abundances are placed in God's service; and we become "a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God." (Rom. 12:1)
Whenever sin is separated from the life, and all is surrendered to God, it is indeed to Him, "a sweet smelling savour."
*******
We're going to pause here.
If you're truly following this, studying this, you'll notice from past blogs we talked about living our lives in Christ after the initial acceptance of Jesus as our Savior. People can stumble after the initial *high* of new life wears off and evil is pounding at them daily. A great trial comes and breaks them. Walking in Christ is so important, knowing how to have faith that will last through the severest of trials necessary.
Read this again--
We must be crucified with Christ.
Then living by the faith of the Son of God," we are "strengthened with might by His Spirit in the inner man." (Gal. 2:20; Eph. 4:16)
The excesses of life are cut away; the abundances are placed in God's service; and we become "a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God." (Rom. 12:1)
Whenever sin is separated from the life, and all is surrendered to God, it is indeed to Him, "a sweet smelling savour."
**
The excesses cut away.
The abundances in God's service.
A living sacrifice.
Holy.
Acceptable unto God.
**
No, we can't save ourselves, but our lives will become a reflection of what God wants of us if we live in Him, if we are 'strengthend with might by His Spirit in the inner man.'
As the sanctuary services reveal not only the sacrifices necessary for our eternal life, it also reveals the way we are to live. We do have parts to play in all this, knowing it is Jesus and only Jesus that saves us, we offer to live for Him, in Him and this is our life, it is His to do with as He wills, and we pray-- Thy will be done.
Amen.

Merry Christmas & Sanctuary Study Pt. 12

I think I'd be a little remiss if I didn't mention that today is Christmas Day. :)
No, it's not the day Christ was born, but it is the day we choose to celebrate His birth by giving to others.
Christ's entire life is about sacrificing self and giving to others. Celebrating Christmas is recognition of giving.
Yes, people might say it's all commercialized and it's about getting not giving, but you can't get unless someone is giving, right? So it's about both really. It's giving in the spirit of such and being able to receive graciously as reward to the gift giver.
To have a day that helps remind us that giving is a good thing can't be all that bad. Even if you don't have *things* to give you can give of your spirit, give your happiness, your well wishing, give the things that cost nothing at all to give, sometimes they can be the best gifts of all.
May we all remember to give selflessly, to love one another, to do as Jesus would have us do through His power, through the power of the Holy Spirit, by the Grace of God now and always. May this coming year be filled with each of us growing closer and closer to Christ until we are known by Him fully, to be of Him.
We will pick up with the study on the Sanctuary now, because there is never a day we should miss studying whenever we can.
With God guiding us let us continue now, taking our Bibles and looking up everything so we can see for ourselves.
Light From the Throne (William Grotheer) -- Part 2 --
The most important service performed in the daily ministration of the sanctuary rituals was that performed in behalf of individuals the sin offerings.
The sin offering did not relate to sin or sinfulness in general, but to a particular manifestation.
"If a soul should sin through ignorance" (in error), prefaced the explanation of the law of sin offerings (Lev. 4:2)
These were sins which arose out of the weaknesses of the flesh.
Those committed with a high hand, that is, "presumptiously," were to be punished by extermination.
The offender was to be"utterly cut off." (Num. 15:28-31)
Lev. {4:2}Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a soul shall sinthrough ignorance against any of the commandments of theLORD [concerning things] which ought not to be done, andshall do against any of them
Num. {15:28} And the priest shall make an atonement for the soulthat sinneth ignorantly, when he sinneth by ignorancebefore the LORD, to make an atonement for him; and itshall be forgiven him. {15:29} Ye shall have one law forhim that sinneth through ignorance, [both for] him that isborn among the children of Israel, and for the stranger thatsojourneth among them.{15:30} But the soul that doeth [ought] presumptuously,[whether he be] born in the land, or a stranger, the samereproacheth the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off fromamong his people. {15:31} Because he hath despised theword of the LORD, and hath broken his commandment, thatsoul shall utterly be cut off; his iniquity [shall be] upon him.
The appeal of the Gospel was based upon the superior ministration of Jesus Christ because "through this Man is preached unto you forgiveness of sins: and by Him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses." (Acts 13:38-39) Jesus Himself declared that there was only one sin which could not and would not be forgiven "in this world" nor "in the world to come" and that was the sin of "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit." (Matt. 12:31-32)
While the law of the sin and trespass offerings are one (Lev. 7:7), the steps of the ritual are given only for the sin offerings. (Lev. 4) It is through this outline that we catch glimpses of the reality of the provision made for man to receive victory over the sin problem. The sin offerings pertained to two categories of sin - corporate and individual - and to two groups in each category; namely, the high priest in his official capacity and the entire congregation; the rulers and the ordinary individuals. It was under the category of "ruler" that the priests as individuals were covered. In Numbers 3:32, the word translated, "chief" (nasi) is the same as translated "ruler" in Lev. 4:22.
In the sin offerings, the kind of animal sacrificed, the disposition of the blood, and the status of the priest who ministered, differed depending whether the sin was corporate or individual. Being a burnt offering, rules governing the basic burnt offering as first outlined in Leviticus applied. It was to be offered "at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation." (Lev. 1:3; 4:4) The offerer was to place his hand upon the head of the sacrifice. (Lev. 1:4; 4:24) The sacrificial animal was to be "accepted for him to make atonement for him." (Lev. 1:4; 4:26) In each instance, the one bringing the sacrifice, slew the animal. (Lev. 1:5; 4:29)
The first category of corporate guilt concerned the High Priest, the spiritual leader of the people. The instruction was that "if the annointed priest sins, bringing guilt on the people" (Lev. 4:3 NKJV), he was to bring a bullock, the largest of all the sacrificial animals, and equal to that required for the whole congregation. (Lev. 4:3,14) While the priest brought the offering as a corporate individual, he ministered the sacrifice in his office as high priest. (4:4-5) The blood was brought into the sanctuary and sprinkled seven times before "the vail of the sanctuary." It was fingerprinted "upon the horns of the altar of sweet incense before the Lord," and the remainder of the blood was poured at the base of the altar of the court. (4:6-7) The fat was removed from the inwards, the kidneys and the folds above the liver. The fat and the kidneys were burned upon the Altar of Burnt Offering. (4:8-10) The rest - "the whole bullock" - was carried "without the camp" and there burned." (4:12)
The same procedure was to be followed when the whole congregation sinned. (4:13-21)
Note again - it was the high priest who ministered the sacrifice, and the blood was brought into the sanctuary. It is important to note these two basics in the law of the sin offering.
These applied to corporate sin; individual sin was dealt with differently.
When a ruler or a "common" person sinned, the sacrificial animal became a goat instead of a bullock.
Three other distinct differences need to be noted.
For the individual, be he a ruler or a common person, one of the sub-priests ministered the sacrifice.
The blood was not taken into the sanctuary, and the whole animal was not burned without the camp.
Instead, the blood of the sacrifice was placed on the horns of the altar of the court, and the balance of the blood poured at the base of the altar. (4:22-26)
The officiating priest was to eat of the victim in the court, designated in this instance as a"holy place." (Lev. 6:25-26)
This was explained by Moses to mean that by this act these common priests were to "bear the iniquity" of the individual members of the congregation "to make atonement for them before the Lord." (Lev. 10:17-18)
The result to the individual and to the congregation as a whole of the mediation of the sin offering was forgiveness. (4:20, 26, 31)
Only in the case of the high priest, when he sinned in such a way as to cause guilt to come upon the whole congregation, is it omitted that forgiveness resulted.
The significance of this difference in the mediating of forgiveness needs to be pondered long by those who stand as spiritual guardians of the people.
The record of confession was marked on the horns of the altar of incense, but how God related to it in type, and how He will relate in reality is not given.
Christ spoke fearful woes upon the spiritual leaders of His day who caused the people to reject truth. (Matt. 23:13-33)
{23:13} But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees,hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven againstmen: for ye neither go in [yourselves,] neither suffer yethem that are entering to go in. {23:14} Woe unto you,scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows’houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore yeshall receive the greater damnation. {23:15} Woe unto you,scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea andland to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye makehim twofold more the child of hell than yourselves. {23:16}Woe unto you, [ye] blind guides, which say, Whosoevershall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shallswear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor! {23:17}[Ye] fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or thetemple that sanctifieth the gold? {23:18} And, Whosoevershall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoeversweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty. {23:19}[Ye] fools and blind: for whether [is] greater, the gift, or thealtar that sanctifieth the gift? {23:20} Whoso therefore shallswear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon.{23:21} And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth byit, and by him that dwelleth therein. {23:22} And he thatshall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, andby him that sitteth thereon. {23:23} Woe unto you, scribesand Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and aniseand cummin, and have omitted the weightier [matters] ofthe law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to havedone, and not to leave the other undone. {23:24} [Ye] blindguides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.{23:25} Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter,but within they are full of extortion and excess. {23:26}[Thou] blind Pharisee, cleanse first that [which is] withinthe cup and platter, that the outside of them may be cleanalso. {23:27} Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees,hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, whichindeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead[men’s] bones, and of all uncleanness. {23:28} Even so yealso outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye arefull of hypocrisy and iniquity. {23:29} Woe unto you,scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build thetombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of therighteous, {23:30} And say, If we had been in the days ofour fathers, we would not have been partakers with them inthe blood of the prophets. {23:31} Wherefore ye bewitnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of themwhich killed the prophets. {23:32} Fill ye up then themeasure of your fathers. {23:33} [Ye] serpents, [ye]generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation ofhell?
The lessons and glimpses of the Reality as revealed in the Law of the Sin Offering need to be carefully considered.
***
We're going to stop here for now and consider all this we've just read.
Yes, differences are there for a reason.
Yes, we need to understand as much as we can.
No, we won't be able to fully comprehend not until Christ comes again, but we need to do our best to try and understand, to seek understanding, enlightenment through the Holy Spirit by the Grace of Jesus.
None of us want to be with those classed as hypocites. We need a clean and righteous heart in Jesus. None of us need an outward showing that is false, God sees right through such an outward showing. We need to be thoroughly and wholly God's, inside and out.
In His Name.
Amen.

The Sanctuary Study Pt. 11

We're going to continue our Sanctuary Study, but first I want to make something clear, I'm not a Seventh-Day Adventist.
Yes, I believe in the Seventh-Day Sabbath, and various other things they believe but I am not one, but that won't keep me from being able to discern the truth they might have from the falsehoods with the Holy Spirit's guidance.
I'm also not saying that all Seventh-Day Adventists are bad, individually only the Lord knows the heart.
With all that in mind let's continue with the Thought Papers of William Grotheer to guide us, but once again, believe nothing but your Bible! Check everything!
1989 Special 2 -- Light From the Throne -- Part 2 --
This first quarter of 1989, the Sabbath School lessons for the Adult Division center on the book of Leviticus. Written by two conservative Seventh-day Adventist scholars, there was cause for hope that some of the previously questionable conclusions regarding the sanctuary service might be corrected. However, this is not the case.
In Lesson 4, January 28, near the close of Section I, subtitled - "Sins of Ignorance" - the traditional explanation is found as to what was transferred to the sanctuary. The first sentence of the note reads - "Priest transfers sin to the sanctuary:" This error should be transparent.
It was blood only that the priest took into the sanctuary for sin and fingerprinted on the Altar of Incense, and sprinkled before the veil.
Now the blood is the life. It is the blood that maketh atonement. (Lev. 17:11)
If, therefore, it is sin, then sin makes the atonement.
No, a thousand times no!
The blood is the record that the penalty has been paid, and the sinner forgiven.
Further thought reveals why sin is not transferred to the sanctuary.
It is already recorded at the moment of transgression. The whole ceremony of Leviticus 4 has to do with sins of ignorance, not on God's part, but on the sinner's part. When the sinner was convicted, a prescribed ritual was performed.
Why then double record sin? This is not what the sinner needs. He needs the assurance of forgiveness and that the penalty for his sin as recorded has been paid.
We nullify a key lesson of Leviticus 4, when we assume that it is teaching the transfer of sin to the sanctuary. There was a transfer of sin, but it was the transfer to the sacrifice.
It was the recognition that a sin had been committed; the transfer of that guilt through the substitute required; and the assurance of forgiveness which is taught in the law of the sin offering.
I repeat, while the animal became sin through transfer and was destroyed when the blood was taken within the sanctuary, it was the blood, the life, indicating that the penalty for sin had been paid that was recorded.
The other method to get sin into the sanctuary as noted by the authors of the Sabbath School lessons was, that the priest who ate of the victim in the case of a ruler or common person's sin, ministered in the daily services offering incense, thereby "symbolically transferred" the sin "to the sanctuary."
(Teacher's Quarterly, p. 54)
Transfer is accomplished in the type by the symbolic laying on of the hand.
Where is such a record in the type for the transfer of sin to the sanctuary when the priest ate of the sacrifice?
In fact, even in the services on the Day of Atonement, the bullock which was offered as a sin offering for Aaron and his house, never had a hand laid upon its head. (Lev. 16:6)
There is further evidence from the Day of Atonement ritual that sin was not transferred to the sanctuary, but had been previously recorded. During the year, no blood was ever taken into the Most Holy Place.
The closest the blood, denoting that the penalty had been paid, ever came to the Most Holy Place, was that blood which was sprinkled before the veil separating the two apartments.
On the Day of Atonement, when the cleansing ritual did bring blood into the Most Holy Place, it was stated that it was being done "because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins." (Lev. 16:16)
If for sake of argument, we should grant that the record of blood was a record of sin, and not a record of the penalty paid for sin, then how did the transgressions and sins get into the Most Holy Place when no such blood over which confessions were made ever entered there?
What we have failed to realize is that the sanctuary services in type are an adjunct to the Reality of the Heavenly Sanctuary explaining how an individual in covenant relationship with God can escape the finality of the judgment.
We refuse to face up to the meaning of Jesus' promise in John 5:24. This verse does not destroy the sanctuary doctrine as some have sought to do with it; but rather it does focus on an area of teaching which needs to be corrected and brought into line with the true revelation of the sanctuary model. This issue of the Commentary will seek to do just that, as well as the issue to follow.
Some have cited Jeremiah (17:1) as proof that sin was transferred to the sanctuary. I, too, have so used this text in times past. Sensing that such a use of this text violates the meaning of the ritual of the sin offering in Leviticus, I checked the context in which Jeremiah was writing. The verse in Jeremiah reads:
"The sin of Judah is written with a pen of iron, and with the point of a diamond: it is graven upon the table of the heart, and upon the horns of your altars."
The next verse introduces "the Asherim" (KJV - "groves") which were worshiped by the green trees on the high hills. The connection between the idolatrous worship or the "hills" and the blood placed on the horns of the altars of the temple must be related to the prophecy of the verses that follow. God would give these "high places for sin" to the spoiler (ver. 3), and Judah herself would serve their enemies in a strange land because what they did provoked the anger of the Lord (ver. 4).
The sin that came upon the altars was a sin so engraved upon their hearts that it could not be erased. Keil and Delitzsch comment as follows:
"It was because the altars and the images of the false gods had entwined themselves as closely about their hearts as their children, so that they brought the sin of their idolatry along with their sacrifices to the altars of Jahveh. The offerings which they bring, in this state of mind, to the Lord are defiled by idolatry and carry their sins to the altar, so that, in the blood which is sprinkled on its horns, the sins of the offerers are poured out on the altar. Hence it appears unmistakably that ver. 1 does not deal with the consciousness of sin as not yet cancelled or forgiven, but with the sin of idolatry, which, ineradically implanted in the hearts of the people and indelibly recorded before God on the horns of the altar, calls down God's wrath in punishment as announced in vers. 3 and 4." (Vol. 8, p. 278)
To cherish the sin for which we ask forgiveness and for which we present the Substitute is duplicity and makes of "the blood of the covenant ... an unholy thing."
The sin of the heart is retained while outwardly confessing its surrender.
This is hypocrisy which God hates.
In the typical service, this stage acting brought sin upon the altars of the sanctuary which God did not intend should be done.
A second error occurs in this same section of the Quarterly.
It states - "In the case of the sin offering for a fellow priest, or for the whole congregation" the blood was taken into the first apartment of the sanctuary. The authors failed to see, and the editors did not catch, that the offering for the priest wherein the blood was taken into the sanctuary, only pertained to the High Priest when he in his official capacity had sinned causing the whole congregation to transgress.
The text reads - "If the anointed priest shall sin so as to bring guilt on the people, then let him offer for his sin ... a young bullock." (Lev. 4:3 ARV)
As an individual sinner, the priest was included in the category of a ruler. See Numbers 3:32, where the same Hebrew word translated "ruler" in Levitucus 4 is there translated, "chief."
We suggest a careful study of all the material which is presented in this Commentary comparing Scripture with Scripture.
**
If you've read this far and feel a little overwhelmed, don't worry it's normal. We really do need to study. Study and understand, not just read and forget, not just read and let it go as something we don't need to really know.
It might not be easy, it might not be *exciting*, but it is important.
Some might counter that it's just semantics and who cares who believes what, but God does care.
Remember a counterfiet is no good if it doesn't mimic almost perfectly the real thing. Being deceived by something that is almost the real thing will leave you saying.. Lord, Lord didn't I do this and that in your name... and the Lord is going to say get away from Him, He never knew you.
Matthew {7:21} Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shallenter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the willof my Father which is in heaven. {7:22} Many will say tome in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thyname? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thyname done many wonderful works? {7:23} And then will Iprofess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, yethat work iniquity.
People are going to fully and truly believe they are doing God's work, but they won't be and the deception seeps in when we turn our backs on the truth, on learning, on delving deeply and wresting scripture against scripture to gain understanding. If you want a flippant, feel good, all play no work walk with God you can have one, I don't want that. I want to understand all I can understand.
It's important to know that details can matter. The tiniest detail can reveal a counterfiet.
No sin enters the Sanctuary.The blood that enters is the sacrifice made for the sinner.
God cannot abide sin. Sin separates from God the two can never be joined. God forgives sin through the sacrifice of His Son, He doesn't condone it.
May we all seek a much closer walk with Christ, a better understanding so that Christ will know us through and through.
In our Savior's all merciful name, by His grace...
Amen.

The Sanctuary Study Pt. 10

Recapping from yesterday - The gospel's principles are in the Sanctuary given back in the desert to Moses. We tend to think of the gospel only in a New Testament way- the Gospel as the good news of Jesus. Taking a bit from yesterday we'll see otherwise...
Basic Principles From God's Viewpoint -- Light From the Throne -- Continued William Grotheer --
The Basic "Gospel" In Leviticus -- The unfolding of the "gospel" revealed in the sanctuary is found in the book of Leviticus. In the instruction for the first offering - the law of the burnt offering - fundamental principles were enunciated.
First, the offering was to be "voluntary" - no coercion. (Lev. 1:3) Even as God freely provided for man's redemption, so man's acceptance of the means of redemption must be from a willing heart.
Secondly, it was to be offered at "the entrance of the tabernacle of the congregation." A significance of this rule will be seen when we study the sin offerings in particular.
Thirdly, the offerer "put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering." (Lev. 1:4) The Hebrew word, samach, means "to lean upon in full support." This word is also used in Amos 5:19 describing a man who leaned with his hand upon a wall. This placing of the hand in full support upon the offering signified total dependence.
Fourth, the offering was "accepted for him to make atonement." This principle is fundamental and applies to all offerings wherein the hand is laid upon the victim. It is especially significant when understood in relationship to the sin offering. In the Hebrew, one word - chatta' th - is used for both "sin" and "sin offering." The sacrificial animal became sin, and was accepted in the place of the offerer. In the elementary burnt offering and in the sin offering, the one offering sacrifice slew the victim. (Lev. 1:5) The disposition of the blood differed, and in the elementary burnt offering, the whole of the animal was burned on the altar. (Lev. 1:7-9) Of Christ, Paul wrote - God "hath made Him to be sin for us." (II Cor. 5:21) Jesus is accepted in our stead to make atonement. Upon Him, we must place our full dependence.
There is deep meaning in the fact that the one bringing the offering, slew the sacrificial victim.I, by my sin, slew the Lamb of God.I, at Calvary, pounded the nails;I, too, pierced His side.I placed the crown of thorns the curse because of sin (Gen. 3:18) upon that holy brow.I mocked;I derided;and I scoffed...because my pride would not accept such a provision.
In all the actions and the attitudes of the people who literally surrounded Golgathal's hill, I can see myself as I am, or ought to be. But when I am willing to go "without the camp, bearing his reproach" (Heb. 13:13), I will find peace with God once more at one with Him - at the altar.
What Is Sin ? -- The basic purpose of the sanctuary rituals was to deal with the sin problem so that communion between God and man might be restored - an at-one-ment be realized.
God desired to dwell among His people whom He had chosen.
In the services prescribed were outlined how man could approach God; and God revealed through them how He planned to eradicate that which had separated -sin.
But first, what is sin? We have a very pat definition for sin -- "Sin is the transgression of ;the law. " But it is more than that. The text reads - note all the words: Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (I John 4;3)
Sin is more than merely the outward act by which the law is violated.
Consider, what God is, not who He is.
In the song of Moses, God is declared to be "a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is He." (Deut. 32:4)
He with whom sin began "abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him." (John 8:44)
Deviation from truth leads to sin, and thus separation from God, who is truth., The way back to God must be a way of truth. That way is in the sanctuary. (Ps. 77:13) This is why the sanctuary truth as entrusted to Adventism is so vital. ((I'm going to interject here in the thought paper and say it is vital to us ALL. Not just Adventists.))
Because God is just and right, He demands that justice be met. Every sin must be accounted for. None - not a single one, no matter how small - dare be overlooked.Every vestige must be ultimately removed from the universe - root and branch. (Mal. 4:1) To ensure this, the most meticulous record system ever devised was set up in Heaven. There the record of every sin is recorded and by whom committed; for all must give an accounting. The Bible is specific that there are books in heaven and the nature of the records contained therein. (Dan. 7:10; Rev. 20:12) With our knowledge of computer technology and recording devices, a text strikes at us: Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice." (Eccl. 5:6)
In this time when we wish to project God as only a God of love, we must keep in mind that the Bible plainly teaches - "Our God is a consuming fire" (Heb. 12:29'); and "it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God" (Heb. 10:31). God is just and requires that justice be meted out against sin and those who persist in sin.
In the first two categories of the law of the sin offerings, the bullock which had been accepted for those confessing was burned without the camp. The text says: The skin of the bullock, and all his flesh, with his head, and with his legs, and his inwards, and his dung, even the whole bullock shall he carry forth without the camp unto a clean place, ... and burn him on the wood with fire. (Lev. 4:11-12; See also verse 21)
The symbol is very clear. Either a substitute was to be "accepted" for the sinner, or else he himself would suffer extinction. God is serious about the sin problem. It will never arise the second time.
In the sanctuary of the Heaven of heavens, all sin will be accounted for, and all sinners will give an accounting.
The earthly sanctuary, as a parable, was cast down beside to show how a sinner can escape the final judgment of God against sin.
For just as surely as we live, we face a judgment.
There is only one exception to this rule. Jesus, the way, the truth, and the life - the living tabernacle in flesh - declared - "Verily verily, I say unto you, He that is hearing my word, and is believing on Him that sent Me, hath life eternal, and shall not come into judgment, but is passed from death unto life." (John 5:24, Greek)
While the Heavenly Sanctuary involves the whole universe, the earthly "model" pictures a way - light from the Throne -- whereby those who enter into covenant relationship with Christ as "minister ... of the true tabernacle" and "mediaor of a better covenant" escape the wrath of God against sin.
(The Sanctuary Studies will be continued in Commentary, Vol. III, Number 2.) --- End --- 1989 Special 1 -- Light From the Throne -- Part 1
*******
There is a way of escape from sin for all of us. The price paid beyond our imagining. As we continue studying the more enlightened we can become with the Holy Spirit guiding us, by the grace of Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior.
Amen.

The Sanctuary Study Pt. 9

Good vs. Evil

The great cosmic battle that involves the whole world and each and every individual.

A battle being fought, sides being chosen, and yet a battle won.

Sometimes hearing the words, 'You don't have to decide just yet.' Are a good thing. They bring relief from pressure, they give you time to think things over and make a decision. Other time hearing those words simply prolongs the agony of indecision. Then again, sometimes hearing the words are nice but being able to make that decision right away feels good- knowing your mind without having to think about it at all.

Too many people live in that world of indecision when it comes to choosing the side they want to be on, good or evil. Too many hover about the middle ground thinking it to be a nice place to hang out not choosing either side. Some lean in one direction or another but aren't making that ultimate choice just yet. It's sad really and life threatening. However, in our world today we've so much confusion that we've pretty much taken the life threatening aspect out of the decision and made it easy for people to hover.

Sin is punishable by death.

The penalty must be paid.

Jesus paid it for all, but all don't accept His sacrifice.

The action on our part towards salvation is to repent and accept sincerely.

Let's read more about the Sanctuary and God's plan for us sinners, the intricate details involved in things can be quite amazing if you're willing to dig deep for them and have more than a surface salvation.

Picking up with William Grotheer's thought paper bits on the Sanctuary we continue here--

Basic Principles From God's Viewpoint -- Light From the Throne -- Continued --

Can God forgive sin as a matter of fact?

The answer is - NO!

Consider the terms of the 40-Day Covenant.

Moses was told - which he in turn conveyed to the people - "Behold, I send an Angel before thee .... Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him." (Ex. 23:20-21)

To forgive sin per se would reflect upon the very character of God, and place in jeopardy the entire universe. A whole series of questions arise. Is God just? Does He mean what He says? Is He infallible? Are there alternatives? Can pluralism exist in the universe? Or is there just one way of righteousness? These questions are as new as today, and as old as eternity, yet basic to the question - Can God forgive sin?

Does God forgive sin?

The answer is YES.

When Israel sinned and broke the 40-Day Covenant, Moses told the people that he would "go up unto the Lord; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin." In speaking with the Lord, Moses made confession for Israel "This people have sinned a great sin." Then he said - "Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their, sin -;" (Ex. 32:31-32) An extended pleading followed on the part of Moses, climaxing in the request - "I beseech thee, show me thy glory." (Ex. 33:18) To this God consented, and placing Moses "in a clift of the rock" and covering him with His hand, He passed by proclaiming "the name of the Lord." In this self-revelation, God declared Himself to be "merciful and gracious ... keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin." (Ex. 33:22; 34:5-7)

How then do we reconcile the Name of the Lord which cannot pardon transgression, and the revelation of that God as merciful, "forgiving ... transgression and sin"? Paul answers this question by stating that "through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, God can remain "just" and yet show forgiving mercy to the one believing "in Jesus." (Rom. 3:24-26)

Romans {3:24} Being justified freely by
his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
{3:25} Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation
through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for
the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance
of God; {3:26} To declare, [I say,] at this time his
righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him
which believeth in Jesus.

This reconciling revelation of God's character is portrayed in the sanctuary services of types and shadows.

Another basic principle from God's viewpoint can be recognized by asking the question - "Can I provide for the forgiveness of my sins?"

The answer is an emphatic - NO!

To do so would be my demise for time and eternity. This is what the Judgment of the Great White Throne is all about. Those who stand to be judged before that Throne must provide for their own transgressions. These can be satisfied only in the second death. (Rev. 20:12-15)

Rev.{20:12} And I saw
the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books
were opened: and another book was opened, which is [the
book] of life: and the dead were judged out of those things
which were written in the books, according to their works.
{20:13} And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and
death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them:
and they were judged every man according to their works.
{20:14} And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire.
This is the second death. {20:15} And whosoever was not
found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of
fire.


God is just. There is a wrath of God against sin. The Third Angel's Message reveals how His wrath will be manifest against those who persist in worshiping the epitome of iniquity. (Rev. 14: 9-10)

Rev. {14:9} And the
third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any
man worship the beast and his image, and receive [his]
mark in his forehead, or in his hand, {14:10} The same shall
drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out
without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall
be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the
holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb


There is only one escape. Having been justified by the blood of Christ, "we shall be saved from wrath through Him." (Rom. 5:9) Again the sanctuary reveals the way.

Romans {5:9}
Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall
be saved from wrath through him.



Vignettes -- In the book of Genesis, there are vignettes revealing man's inability to face his Maker in an acceptable way. The record states that as soon as the first pair sinned, they perceived their nakedness, and made for themselves "aprons" of fig leaves. (Gen. 3:7) But when the Lord God called to Adam - "Where art thou?" - he responded - "I was afraid because naked I (am); and I hid myself." (3:10, Heb.) You will observe that in the KJV, the word, "was," is supplied. The word order of the Hebrew would indicate the use of "am" rather than "was". Even though Adam, and Eve had covered their nakedness with a garment of their devising; when facing God, they sensed how totally inadequate was the "apron" of their making. To meet their need, God Himself took the first life ever taken in the universe from all eternity, and made for them "coats of skins." (3:21) In the light of this sketch, how vain is the hope that man can by his works obtain the favor of God, and thereby atone for his transgressions.

The word sketch from the life of Cain and Abel reveals a fundamental principle upon which the message of the sanctuary is based.

Cain brought of the fruit of the ground and expected the Lord to accept his offering. He perceived of it as something he had produced, even as his parents had made "aprons" from the things of nature.

Abel, on the other hand, brought of the flock, and life was taken.

God can forgive sin, but only when the penalty of that sin is met.

Abel provided his recognition of that fact. "The Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering: but unto Cain and to his offering He had not respect." (Gen. 4:4-5)

How is man to regain acceptance with God? Through his works? A thousand times - No!

How then?

Through the acceptance from God of the Offering He has provided.

In other words, Abel "obeyed" the gospel. He accepted the basic principle upon which God could be just and the justifier of those who would accept His provision for sin. Tragically, there will be untold millions even professed Christians - who will suffer the "vengeance" of "flaming fire" because they "know not God and ... obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." (II Thess. 1:8)

God is just and cannot condone sin. Because man cannot provide for his own nakedness, God has provided a covering in Jesus Christ. This is the gospel.

This is the way of God in the sanctuary. The acceptance of that way is to "obey the gospel."

The Basic "Gospel" In Leviticus -- The unfolding of the "gospel" revealed in the sanctuary is found in the book of Leviticus. In the instruction for the first offering - the law of the burnt offering - fundamental principles were enunciated.

First, the offering was to be "voluntary" - no coercion. (Lev. 1:3) Even as God freely provided for man's redemption, so man's acceptance of the means of redemption must be from a willing heart.

Secondly, it was to be offered at "the entrance of the tabernacle of the congregation." A significance of this rule will be seen when we study the sin offerings in particular.

Thirdly, the offerer "put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering." (Lev. 1:4) The Hebrew word, samach, means "to lean upon in full support." This word is also used in Amos 5:19 describing a man who leaned with his hand upon a wall. This placing of the hand in full support upon the offering signified total dependence.

Fourth, the offering was "accepted for him to make atonement." This principle is fundamental and applies to all offerings wherein the hand is laid upon the victim. It is especially significant when understood in relationship to the sin offering. In the Hebrew, one word - chatta' th - is used for both "sin" and "sin offering." The sacrificial animal became sin, and was accepted in the place of the offerer. In the elementary burnt offering and in the sin offering, the one offering sacrifice slew the victim. (Lev. 1:5) The disposition of the blood differed, and in the elementary burnt offering, the whole of the animal was burned on the altar. (Lev. 1:7-9) Of Christ, Paul wrote - God "hath made Him to be sin for us." (II Cor. 5:21) Jesus is accepted in our stead to make atonement. Upon Him, we must place our full dependence.


***

I'm going to stop here for now, but there is so much more to go into, so much more to understand. If you can, look up each and every verse mentioned here, study the word of God, study as if your life depends upon understanding because it really does.

We need to understand that there is only one sacrifice acceptable to God and it's not anything we have to offer, not one single thing. We can be the best person in all the world giving millions to millions, helping in everyway we can, we can devote our lives to the service of others living frugally just so we can give more to others and in the end that will mean absolutely nothing if we haven't Christ. If we don't realize that nothing we do will save us but go on trying to save ourselves, we're lost.

The Sanctuary services were in place for thousands of years. The Sanctuary was given to God's chosen people so that they might know the way to God. The Sanctuary was a type, a shadow of the heavenly. Christ came as a living Sanctuary and we need to realize that just as those before Christ who came to the earthly sanctuary and with a sincere heart of repentance brought a sin offering to God, pleading for forgiveness, leaning on that living sacrificial lamb and then knowing that the price of their transgression warranted an innocent life, they took the knife and sliced the throat of the lamb. Just as that person was truly forgiven by the realization of sin demanding death and sacrifice, we too are truly forgiven when we realize that our sins are placed upon Jesus and he died so he could save us, He is our Sacrificial Lamb without Him there is no hope. There is nothing we can do to save ourselves, nothing.

May God help us, keep us, teach us, show us all we need to know to be His and for us to know Him and for Him to know us.

By His Grace and Mercy, now and forever.

Amen.