The Services of the Sanctuary Study continue.
Understanding the service of the Sanctuary is important. We were given a type to prefigure the actual. Jesus is our sacrifice, very few who believe in God will debate that Jesus died for us. Very few will debate that Jesus is our savior, He died in our place taking our sins upon Him so we may be forgiven by Him and made acceptable to God, made At-one with God. For a service that was enacted thousands of years before Christ as a type that would be fulfilled in his coming- living and dying, living again for us, we need to understand this to the best of our ability. To ignore it as something that never mattered, that doesn't matter is to hide our heads in the sand. Let's try to understand this better with the help of someone who has studied it extensively using the Bible as his guide.
Thought Paper -- 2000 Apr XXXIII 4(00) -- William Grotheer
The Sin Offerings --
The sin offerings are defined in Leviticus 4.
Again it must be emphasized that these offerings covered in a ceremonial aspect only sins of "'ignorance" (4:1)
...which at the time when committed the sinner was not conscience that he had sinned (4:28).
The purposeful sin was not provided for in the ceremonial sacrifices.
David was well aware of this when after his sin of adultery compounded by murder, he acknowledged, "For Thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering" (Ps. 51:16).
Paul emphasized this weakness in the ceremonial law when he presented Jesus in the Jewish synagogue at Antioch in Pisidia. He said:
Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this Man is preached unto you the 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)
This emphasizes the fact that the law of Moses could not take away sin, and that the services were but "examples and shadows" of the heavenly reality in and through Jesus Christ "who was delivered for our offences, and raised for our justification" (Rom. 4:25).
He ministered on earth as a common priest of a different order than the Aaronic, and now in the heavenly sanctuary, He continues as our great High Priest after the Order of Meichisedec. (Heb. 7:21).
The sin offerings of Leviticus 4 are divided into four categories -
1) The High Priest when he sinned in such a way "so as to bring guilt on the people" (4:3 ARV)
2) The whole congregation.
3) The rulers.
4) And the common people.
There are common factors in all four categories.
The first is the act in each instance of laying the hand upon the head of ihe designated sacrifice, whether it be the individual sinner or the elders of Israel in case the whole congregation sinned. (4:4, 15, 24, 29, 33)
This represented confession, transfer, and dependence on the part of the offerer(s). This last representation is not readily perceived inasmuch as we think of the laying on of the hand the same as is done in anointing the sick, or consecrating one to an holy office. The word used In the Hebrew - samach - "shall lay" is used In Ps. 88:7 where It is translated - "Thy wrath lieth hard upon me;" and in Amos 5:19 translated, leaned, implying full weight. Gesenius in commenting on the use of the word in Leviticus states the meaning as "to lay the hand upon anything, so as to lean upon it." Then the offerer had to slay the victim. His sin caused the necessity for the animal to die.
This typical point dare not be overlooked. I have contributed to the murder of the Lord Jesus Christ; I, too, have sinned and do sin.
The second common factor in three of the four categories of the sin offering is the fact that through the ministration of the priest, forgiveness resulted to the sinner (4:20, 26, 31, 35).
He cannot forgive himself; he must trust in the forgiveness extended through the mediation of the priest.
In the interpretation of this symbol, we see the gulf between Romanism and Protestantism.
The Protestant accepting it as typical, perceives the priestly ministry of Jesus Christ, while Romanism adopting it in a literal sense interposes a human mediatorial system between the sinner and God.
It is in the priestly ministry of the sin offerings that distinctions are made in the four categories.
When the High Priest ("the priest that is anointed") sins so as to bring guilt on the people, or the whole congregation sins, it was a corporate sin. The blood of the sin offering - a bullock - was mediated by the high priest (4:16). The blood was taken within the sanctuary and sprinkled before the veil that separated the holy from the most holy place. A record of confession was finger printed on the horns of the altar of incense. The remainder of the blood was poured at the base of the altar in the court (4:17-18). Only certain parts of the sacrificed bullock were burned on the altar. The rest was carried without the camp and burned "where the ashes are poured out" (4:8-12).
When the ruler, or common person sinned, the common priest ministered the sacrifice. The blood was not taken within the sanctuary, but a record of the confession was finger printed on the horns of the altar in the court, and the balance of the blood was poured at its base (4:25). A special law was given concerning the sin offering for a ruler or common person. It read: 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 oftereth it for sin shall eat it: in the holy place shall it be eaten, in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation (6:25-26).
Certain points need to be itemized:
1) The place where the sin offering was killed was the same "where the burnt offering was killed." This was at "the door of the tabernacle of the congregration before the Lord" (1:3).
2) The whole of this priestly ministry was done "in the court," and
3) The common priest became a sin bearer by eating of the offering to which the sin had been transferred by the sinner.
Nowhere in the typical services was provision made for the common priest to transfer this sin that he carried to the sanctuary. He accepted it and bore it in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation.
The antitypical significance of this law of the sin offering needs to be carefully studied. In the symbolism, the court is the earth (Rev. 11:2).
{11:2}But the court which is without the temple leave out, andmeasure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holycity shall they tread under foot forty [and] two months.
To this earth Christ came, partaking of our flesh and blood (Heb. 2:14).
{2:14} Forasmuch then as thechildren are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himselflikewise took part of the same; that through death he mightdestroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
Paul writes that God "hath made Him to be sin for us" (II Cor. 5:21).
{5:21} For he hath made him [to be] sinfor us, who knew no sin; that we might be made therighteousness of God in him.
Further, since "it is of necessity that (Christ) have somewhat also to offer" before He could become high priest (Heb. 8:3)
{8:3} For every highpriest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore [itis] of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.
... and since He could not be a priest in the Hebrew temple because he was of the tribe of Judah and not of the house of Aaron, He ministered as a common priest during His earthly life on the journey to the Cross. (See Hebrews 7:12-16; 8:4)
{7:12} For the priesthood being changed, there is made ofnecessity a change also of the law. {7:13} For he of whomthese things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of whichno man gave attendance at the altar. {7:14} For [it is]evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribeMoses spake nothing concerning priesthood. {7:15} And itis yet far more evident: for that after the similitude ofMelchisedec there ariseth another priest, {7:16} Who ismade, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but afterthe power of an endless life.
{8:4} For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest,seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to thelaw.
The highest atonement the common priest could minister was the atonement of forgiveness (Lev.4:31). This Christ made plain that He as the Son of man could do. To the man who had been let down through the roof, Jesus said - "Man, thy sins are forgiven thee" (Luke 5:20). The scribes and Pharisees present began reasoning in their minds that this was blasphemous. When Jesus perceived their thinking, He declared: What reason ye in your hearts? Whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Rise up and walk? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power upon earth to forgive sins, (He said unto the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy couch, and go into thine house. And immediately he rose up before them. (Luke 5:22-25)
This distinction in the type needs more and careful study.
The common priest ministered the sin offering for the individual;
the high priest for the corporate sins of the nation.
The atonement of forgiveness for the individual was consummated at the Altar in the court,
and the ultimate sin transfer was to the common priest where it stopped.
The blood of corporate confession was taken within the sanctuary by the high priest and the confession recorded there.
Why the difference, and what is this difference in type telling us? This is an area for continued study.
We suggest that the symbolism used in the transfer of sin and the forgiveness extended to the individual in the court but echoes the thought that the highest place man of himself can attain is at the foot of the cross where he can look "up to the One who died to save him," and "rejoice with fullness of joy; for his sins are pardoned."
Consideration also needs to be given to the category in which the priest as an individual sinner would be classified. In Numbers 3:32, "Eleazar the son of Aaron" is placed as "chief over the chief of the Levites." This word, "chief" (nahsee') is the same word as is used in Leviticus 4 for "ruler" (v. 22). When a priest sinned, his offering would be mediated through a common priest, and thus the confession and atonement of forgiveness would be culminated in the court at the Altar of Burnt Offering, the same as for any other ruler, chief, or prince.
In their official capacity as ministering common priests, Moses declared plainly to "Eleazar and Ithamar, sons of Aaron" - "God hath given it you to bear the iniquity of the congregation to make atonement for them before the Lord" (Lev. 10:17). "To bear" does not mean "to transfer." Christ as the Lamb of God bore the sins of the world. (Isa. 53:11; John 1:29, margin). Christ did not transfer what He took. Any endeavor to transfer to the sanctuary the sin the common priest assumed symbolically by eating of the sin offering of a ruler, or a common person is without Scriptural basis. Nowhere on record is there a single incident recorded of such a transfer. To do so would destroy the type of the ministry of Jesus Christ as a common priest before His elevation to the office of High Priest after His resurrection.
Other Facets -- In the "law of the sin offering," it is stated of the sin offering - "It is most holy" (Lev. 6:25). One reacts in amazement. The animal upon which sin was confessed - "most holy"? Yes, and it was that victim of which the common priest was to eat in providing the atonement of forgiveness for the sinner. It stands as a symbol of Him who partook of our fallen nature and whose "soul" was made "an offering for sin" (Isa. 53:10). Though bearing our nature, He was most holy. Even a demon when confronted by Jesus cried out - "I know thee who thou art: the Holy One of God" (Luke 4:34).
In discussing above the first act the sinner did in bringing his sin offering, that of laying his hand on the victim's head, we noted that it represented confession, transfer and dependence (p.4). There we emphasized the dependence aspect, but the other aspects need also to be enlarged upon. The confession was not to be a general confession but was required to be specific. Beside the sin offerings, there were trespass offerings. In the presentation of these offerings, the rule was stated - "It shall be, when he shall be guilty in one of these things, that he shall confess that he hath sinned in that thing" (Lev. 5:5). The same would apply to the sin offerings. In the New Testament, "confession" is the one condition given for forgiveness. "If we confess our sins, (Christ) is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (I John 1:9).
Closely connected with confession is transfer. Since we can neither forgive ourselves, nor bear the consequence of our sins, the guilt and its penalty must be borne by someone else. In the typical services outlined for the wilderness sanctuary, there was transferred either to the sanctuary, or to the common priest the guilt of sin via the prescribed victim. Now was this done so as to record sin, or was it the record of confession of a sin already recorded? The specifics of these ceremonial offerings limited the sin to "ignorance" Lev. 4:2), and that when convicted, the sinner responded with the designated offering (4:23, 28). The sin had already been committed, and the record made. If the sin offering was the means whereby the sin was placed on record, then the best way to have no sin registered against one was not to bring a sin offering.
Another question needs to be raised regarding the blood of the sin offering. Did it defile the sanctuary? I find no Scriptural record so stating. How can the blood of that which is declared to be "most holy" defile? In fact, there is on record the rule that if a man does not avail himself of the provisions of the ceremonial code in regard to uncleanness, he shall be cut off from the congregation "because he hath defiled the: sanctuury of the Lord" (Numbers 19:20). This was concerning the provisions of the offering of the red heifer. Thus it would appear that failure to bring the prescribed offering would defile rather than the blood of the sin offering brought. It is also of note that the blood of any sin offering which required the laying on of the hand in confession is involved with the registry of guilt and confession, while the blood of the sin offerings on the Day of Atonement on which no hand was laid in confession, cleansed not only the sanctuary, but also was "for the priests, and for all the people of the congregation" (Lev. 16:33). But this must await another "Review."
1) All transliterations from the Hebrew in the above article are taken from the Englishman's Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance.
***
Our sins are forgiven by Jesus, He took on our sins. We need to continue to confess our sins to Jesus a priest unlike any other and the only priest that can save us. Confessing our sins to any other is pointless. We are saved only by Jesus. This has to be an active confession because without an active confession we cannot be forgive. "If we confess our sins, (Christ) is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (I John 1:9).
If we confess.
Before Jesus confessing was a prelude before transferring sin. After Jesus it is the same, only our sin transfer goes onto Jesus, not an animal.
There is just so much to absorb here. May God help us to understand what we need to know of His great and wonderful plan for us. May we make it a reality in our lives not something fictional. By the grace of Jesus, by the mercy of our Lord and Savior, may we all be blessed by the Holy Spirit's guidance.
Amen.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
The Sanctuary Study Pt. 18
2000 Apr XXXIII 4(00)William Grotheer -- The Signifance of the Wilderness Sanctuary -- Editor's Preface --
In writing to the Hebrews, Paul indicates that the Gospel was preached unto the Israelites as well as it had been preached to those to whom he was writing (4:2). The gospel message to the children of Israel, though not a different gospel, was revealed in "types" and "shadows."
These examples and shadows, while prefiguring the true, could never take away sin.
However, they did serve a purpose.
Through these we can understand the service now being ministered in the heavenly sanctuary by our great High Priest, who when He has finished His priestly work will come a "second time without sin unto salvation" (Heb. 9:28).
Within the "review" of "The Significance of the Wilderness Sanctuary," we note the faulty translation by the NIV of Heb. 8:5 in contrast to the strict adherence to Greek grammar by the KJV. There are certain traditional perceptions of the types and shadows for which no Scriptural justification can be found. These we had to question, and seek to present their meaning in the light of what is actually stated in the book of Leviticus. Where there is silence, assumptions are not justifiable.
In the previous issue of WWN, in the "Editor's Preface," we mentioned some exegesis which made us cringe without identifying the source or the text that was being mutilated. In thinking about it, we did not believe this was fair to our readers, so in this issue we discuss this text and note the source of the faulty exegesis.
The editorial - "Let's Talk It Over" - touches a very vital issue - Honesty or Policy. If we give our word, should we keep it, or can we just ignore what we have said? It also enters into another area. What obligation is incumbent upon one who publishes? Does he have a right to be discourteous,and not even acknowledge the receipt of an inquiry which might question what he writes? It would seem that if a response challenges his position, if he sincerely wants truth, pure and unadulterated, he would be willing to dialogue and let his position be thoroughly discussed and questioned. We talk about righteousness by faith, but we see very little of it.
"Review, and then Review again, and Review all that you've Reviewed"
The Signifance of the Wilderness Experience -- In the previous issue of WWN, we discussed not only the experience of Israel in their consent to the Old Covenant, but also the lesson it conveys to us today; namely, that man is powerless to keep His commitment to God. Another way must be found.
While in the mount with God (Ex. 24:18), Moses received the blueprint for the Sanctuary to be built in the Wilderness (Ex. 25:8-9).
This Sanctuary and its services were integrated into the "type" covenant that God made with Moses and with Israel (Ex. 34:27).
The "old" covenant which Israel broke in the worship of the golden calf no longer had validity.
The stated purpose of the wilderness Sanctuary was that God wanted to dwell among His people (Ex. 25:8).
The Psalmist describes the "Shepherd of Israel" as He "that dwellest between the cherubim" in the most holy apartment of the Sanctuary (Ps. 80:1). In another Psalm, Asaph sings, "Thy way, 0 God, is in the sanctuary" (Ps. 77:13). But access to God was limited. Only the High Priest, and then only once a year, could enter the second veil into the presence of the Divine Glory which enshrouded the ark of the covenant. The common priests could enter the first apartment or holy place. The individual Israelite was restricted to the court which surrounded the Sanctuary. There he brought his confessional sin offering.
The offerings and their objective were outlined in a separate book - Leviticus. All sins were not covered, only sins of ignorance when brought to memory (Lev. 4:27-28). In other words as stated in the book of Hebrews, "it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins" (10:4). "The law made nothing perfect" (7:19).
What then was the purpose that God had in mind in having this wilderness sanctuary erected? Nothing is indicated in the Old Testament, except that Moses was to build the sanctuary and its furniture according to the blueprint shown to him at Mt. Sinai (Ex. 25:40).
Paul in the book of Hebrews uses this verse in connection with the ministry of the priests (Heb. 8:4-5). The KJV reads - "There are priests that offer gifts according to the law who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things." However, the NIV reads - "There are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law. They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven." These translations are not saying the same thing. Is it the sanctuary that is "a copy and shadow or is it the service of the priests which is "the example and shadow of heavenly things"?
Both "example" or "copy" ('upodeigati) and "shadow" (skia) are in the dative case. Robertson stated that "the accusative, genitive and dative are all cases of inner relations, but the dative has a personal touch not true of the others. The dative is not a local case. There was originally no idea of place in it. It is thus a purely grammatical case. (It) is used of a person, not place" (A Grammar of the Greek New Testament, p.536).
Thus Paul is saying that the "example and shadow" are related to the service of the priests, and not the "place" they serve.
The sanctuary reflected a service, and was not intended to convey the reality of heaven. This should be readily grasped by one simple comparison. In the sanctuary built by Moses, the first apartment, or holy place, contained as one of its articles of furniture, the Table of Shewbread (Ex. 25:23-30). While in the New Testament, one can find reference to the other two articles of furniture, the candlesticks and the altar of the incense as a part of a heavenly sanctuary, there is no reference to a "heavenly Table of Shewbread."
While there are many spiritual lessons which can be drawn from the typical pattern given to Moses, we need to be constantly mindful in the study of the sanctuary that the emphasis is not on the "place" symbolized but upon the ministry of the One who serves -
The "minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man" (Heb. 8:2). This is indicated to be "the sum" or chief point (v.1). If we had been as diligent in focusing on that ministry as we have been on seeking a significance for every article, and aspect of the physical structure of the sanctuary, we would be well in advance of where we are now in our perception of truth.
The Daily Service --
"The altar of burnt offering, which stood in the court outside of the tabernacle, was always In use; that is, there was always a sacrifice on the altar. Each morning a lamb was offered for the nation, and this lamb, after being prepared by the priests, was placed on the altar, where it was slowly consumed by the fire. It was not permitted to burn quickly, for it was to last till evening, when another lamb was offered, which was to burn till the morning offering was ready. (See Ex. 29:38-41)
"Thus there was always a sacrifice on the altar, day and night, a symbol of the perpetual atonement provided in Christ. There was no time when Israel was not covered by a propitiatory sacrifice. At whatever time they sinned they knew that a lamb was on the altar and that forgiveness was theirs upon repentance. The Jewish Encyclopedia, volume 2, p.277, says, ' The morning sacrifice atoned for the sins committed during the previous night, the afternoon sacrifice for the sins committed in the daytime.'
"This morning and evening oblation was offered every day of the year and was never to be omitted. Even though there might be special occasions that called for more elaborate sacrifices, the morning and evening burnt sacrifice for the nation was always offered.
On the Sabbath day this offering was doubled: two lambs were offered in the morning and two in the evening.
Even on the Day of Atonement this ritual was carried out.
Sixteen times in chapters 28 and 29 of Numbers does God emphasize that no other offering is to take the place of the continual burnt offerings. Each time another sacrifice is mentioned, it is stated that this is besides the 'continual burnt offering.' From its perpetual nature it was called the continual, or daily, sacrifice. ...
"It ... needs to be emphasized that the temporary provision made for sin in the daily sacrifice for the nation became efficacious only as the offender made personal confession of sin and brought his individual sacrifice for sin, just as a sinner is now saved by Christ's sacrifice on Calvary only if he personally accepts Christ. The death of the Lamb of God on Golgotha was for all men, but only those who accept the sacrifice and make personal application of it will be saved. In the light of these considerations the statement in I Timothy 4:10 becomes luminous: Christ 'is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.' From day to day the lives of sinners have been spared; they have been saved temporarily and provisionally. But this extended grace will not avail unless they repent and turn to God. ...
"Spiritually viewed, the national burnt offering signified two things: first, Christ sacrificing Himself for man, providing atonement for all; second, the people dedicating themselves to God by putting all on the altar. (It was the whole lamb that was offered in contrast to certain parts as required in the sin offerings.) It is to this latter that Paul referred when he admonished Christians, 'Present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is youi reasonable service.' Rom. 12:1." (M. L. Andreasen, The Book of Hebrews, pp.372-374)
******Pausing here because there is just a lot to digest before we go on.
It's true that we need to understand the Sanctuary all of it. The structure as well as the service of it. When you build a house is it there just to look at? No. What good is an empty house to anyone? An empty house with no one to live in it will soon deteriorate. An empty house with no one to upkeep it will become unlivable.
The point to an empty house is exactly what?
Having a Sanctuary without any service would be what? An empty house, a place with no meaning, serving no purpose. So to expound on the fact that the service of the Sanctuary is important to understand seems only logical to me. The things of the Sanctuary have no purpose without the services attended to them.
I look forward to more of this study of the services of the Sanctuary, Jesus is OUR High Priest and as such we need to know what our High Priest in all His capacity does. The role of our Lord and Savior, as Sacrifice and Redeemer, as Lamb and Lord needs a lot of study, we need to know Him and have Him know us.
By the grace of God, by the will of the Father, by the mercy of our Lord and Savior...
Amen.
In writing to the Hebrews, Paul indicates that the Gospel was preached unto the Israelites as well as it had been preached to those to whom he was writing (4:2). The gospel message to the children of Israel, though not a different gospel, was revealed in "types" and "shadows."
These examples and shadows, while prefiguring the true, could never take away sin.
However, they did serve a purpose.
Through these we can understand the service now being ministered in the heavenly sanctuary by our great High Priest, who when He has finished His priestly work will come a "second time without sin unto salvation" (Heb. 9:28).
Within the "review" of "The Significance of the Wilderness Sanctuary," we note the faulty translation by the NIV of Heb. 8:5 in contrast to the strict adherence to Greek grammar by the KJV. There are certain traditional perceptions of the types and shadows for which no Scriptural justification can be found. These we had to question, and seek to present their meaning in the light of what is actually stated in the book of Leviticus. Where there is silence, assumptions are not justifiable.
In the previous issue of WWN, in the "Editor's Preface," we mentioned some exegesis which made us cringe without identifying the source or the text that was being mutilated. In thinking about it, we did not believe this was fair to our readers, so in this issue we discuss this text and note the source of the faulty exegesis.
The editorial - "Let's Talk It Over" - touches a very vital issue - Honesty or Policy. If we give our word, should we keep it, or can we just ignore what we have said? It also enters into another area. What obligation is incumbent upon one who publishes? Does he have a right to be discourteous,and not even acknowledge the receipt of an inquiry which might question what he writes? It would seem that if a response challenges his position, if he sincerely wants truth, pure and unadulterated, he would be willing to dialogue and let his position be thoroughly discussed and questioned. We talk about righteousness by faith, but we see very little of it.
"Review, and then Review again, and Review all that you've Reviewed"
The Signifance of the Wilderness Experience -- In the previous issue of WWN, we discussed not only the experience of Israel in their consent to the Old Covenant, but also the lesson it conveys to us today; namely, that man is powerless to keep His commitment to God. Another way must be found.
While in the mount with God (Ex. 24:18), Moses received the blueprint for the Sanctuary to be built in the Wilderness (Ex. 25:8-9).
This Sanctuary and its services were integrated into the "type" covenant that God made with Moses and with Israel (Ex. 34:27).
The "old" covenant which Israel broke in the worship of the golden calf no longer had validity.
The stated purpose of the wilderness Sanctuary was that God wanted to dwell among His people (Ex. 25:8).
The Psalmist describes the "Shepherd of Israel" as He "that dwellest between the cherubim" in the most holy apartment of the Sanctuary (Ps. 80:1). In another Psalm, Asaph sings, "Thy way, 0 God, is in the sanctuary" (Ps. 77:13). But access to God was limited. Only the High Priest, and then only once a year, could enter the second veil into the presence of the Divine Glory which enshrouded the ark of the covenant. The common priests could enter the first apartment or holy place. The individual Israelite was restricted to the court which surrounded the Sanctuary. There he brought his confessional sin offering.
The offerings and their objective were outlined in a separate book - Leviticus. All sins were not covered, only sins of ignorance when brought to memory (Lev. 4:27-28). In other words as stated in the book of Hebrews, "it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins" (10:4). "The law made nothing perfect" (7:19).
What then was the purpose that God had in mind in having this wilderness sanctuary erected? Nothing is indicated in the Old Testament, except that Moses was to build the sanctuary and its furniture according to the blueprint shown to him at Mt. Sinai (Ex. 25:40).
Paul in the book of Hebrews uses this verse in connection with the ministry of the priests (Heb. 8:4-5). The KJV reads - "There are priests that offer gifts according to the law who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things." However, the NIV reads - "There are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law. They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven." These translations are not saying the same thing. Is it the sanctuary that is "a copy and shadow or is it the service of the priests which is "the example and shadow of heavenly things"?
Both "example" or "copy" ('upodeigati) and "shadow" (skia) are in the dative case. Robertson stated that "the accusative, genitive and dative are all cases of inner relations, but the dative has a personal touch not true of the others. The dative is not a local case. There was originally no idea of place in it. It is thus a purely grammatical case. (It) is used of a person, not place" (A Grammar of the Greek New Testament, p.536).
Thus Paul is saying that the "example and shadow" are related to the service of the priests, and not the "place" they serve.
The sanctuary reflected a service, and was not intended to convey the reality of heaven. This should be readily grasped by one simple comparison. In the sanctuary built by Moses, the first apartment, or holy place, contained as one of its articles of furniture, the Table of Shewbread (Ex. 25:23-30). While in the New Testament, one can find reference to the other two articles of furniture, the candlesticks and the altar of the incense as a part of a heavenly sanctuary, there is no reference to a "heavenly Table of Shewbread."
While there are many spiritual lessons which can be drawn from the typical pattern given to Moses, we need to be constantly mindful in the study of the sanctuary that the emphasis is not on the "place" symbolized but upon the ministry of the One who serves -
The "minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man" (Heb. 8:2). This is indicated to be "the sum" or chief point (v.1). If we had been as diligent in focusing on that ministry as we have been on seeking a significance for every article, and aspect of the physical structure of the sanctuary, we would be well in advance of where we are now in our perception of truth.
The Daily Service --
"The altar of burnt offering, which stood in the court outside of the tabernacle, was always In use; that is, there was always a sacrifice on the altar. Each morning a lamb was offered for the nation, and this lamb, after being prepared by the priests, was placed on the altar, where it was slowly consumed by the fire. It was not permitted to burn quickly, for it was to last till evening, when another lamb was offered, which was to burn till the morning offering was ready. (See Ex. 29:38-41)
"Thus there was always a sacrifice on the altar, day and night, a symbol of the perpetual atonement provided in Christ. There was no time when Israel was not covered by a propitiatory sacrifice. At whatever time they sinned they knew that a lamb was on the altar and that forgiveness was theirs upon repentance. The Jewish Encyclopedia, volume 2, p.277, says, ' The morning sacrifice atoned for the sins committed during the previous night, the afternoon sacrifice for the sins committed in the daytime.'
"This morning and evening oblation was offered every day of the year and was never to be omitted. Even though there might be special occasions that called for more elaborate sacrifices, the morning and evening burnt sacrifice for the nation was always offered.
On the Sabbath day this offering was doubled: two lambs were offered in the morning and two in the evening.
Even on the Day of Atonement this ritual was carried out.
Sixteen times in chapters 28 and 29 of Numbers does God emphasize that no other offering is to take the place of the continual burnt offerings. Each time another sacrifice is mentioned, it is stated that this is besides the 'continual burnt offering.' From its perpetual nature it was called the continual, or daily, sacrifice. ...
"It ... needs to be emphasized that the temporary provision made for sin in the daily sacrifice for the nation became efficacious only as the offender made personal confession of sin and brought his individual sacrifice for sin, just as a sinner is now saved by Christ's sacrifice on Calvary only if he personally accepts Christ. The death of the Lamb of God on Golgotha was for all men, but only those who accept the sacrifice and make personal application of it will be saved. In the light of these considerations the statement in I Timothy 4:10 becomes luminous: Christ 'is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.' From day to day the lives of sinners have been spared; they have been saved temporarily and provisionally. But this extended grace will not avail unless they repent and turn to God. ...
"Spiritually viewed, the national burnt offering signified two things: first, Christ sacrificing Himself for man, providing atonement for all; second, the people dedicating themselves to God by putting all on the altar. (It was the whole lamb that was offered in contrast to certain parts as required in the sin offerings.) It is to this latter that Paul referred when he admonished Christians, 'Present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is youi reasonable service.' Rom. 12:1." (M. L. Andreasen, The Book of Hebrews, pp.372-374)
******Pausing here because there is just a lot to digest before we go on.
It's true that we need to understand the Sanctuary all of it. The structure as well as the service of it. When you build a house is it there just to look at? No. What good is an empty house to anyone? An empty house with no one to live in it will soon deteriorate. An empty house with no one to upkeep it will become unlivable.
The point to an empty house is exactly what?
Having a Sanctuary without any service would be what? An empty house, a place with no meaning, serving no purpose. So to expound on the fact that the service of the Sanctuary is important to understand seems only logical to me. The things of the Sanctuary have no purpose without the services attended to them.
I look forward to more of this study of the services of the Sanctuary, Jesus is OUR High Priest and as such we need to know what our High Priest in all His capacity does. The role of our Lord and Savior, as Sacrifice and Redeemer, as Lamb and Lord needs a lot of study, we need to know Him and have Him know us.
By the grace of God, by the will of the Father, by the mercy of our Lord and Savior...
Amen.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
The Sanctuary Pt. 17
DANIEL 8:14 -- The KJV reads "Unto two thousand and three hundred days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed."
We have, therefore, associated this verse with the Day of Atonement, and have concluded that following the culmination of the 2300 days in 1844, the ministry of Christ would begin in the Heavenly Reality as prefigured in the type.
However, the Hebrew Masoretic text reads sadaq in the Niphal or passive form and means "to be justified or vindicated." (Gesenius)
It is obvious that should the Masoretic text stand without challenge, it would be difficult to associate Daniel 8:14 with Leviticus 16.
The Septuagint (LXX) a Greek translation of the Old Testament older than the manuscripts on which the Masoretic Hebrew text is based reads - "shall be cleansed" - using the future passive form of katharizo.
Here there is a connection with Leviticus 16 for the same word is used twice in verse 30, once as an infinitive, and once using the same passive form as in Daniel 8:14. The Douay Bible following the Latin word used in the Vulgate -- mundabitur - reads also, shall be cleansed."
How can the difference between the Hebrew text and the LXX and Vulgate translations of the Old Testament be reconciled in regard to Daniel 8:14?
Hebrew scholars have long held that the Hebrew portions of Daniel (1-2:4a; 8-12) were translated from Aramaic originals.
This hypothesis was confirmed by the studies of Zimmermann in 1938 and 1939. Building on this, Dr. H. Louis Ginsberg, Sabato Morais Professor of Bible at The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, stated the Aramaic for Daniel 8:14 would read - "the sanctuary will become clean (or be cleansed)"
He maintains that the Hebrew text which led to the Masoretic use of sadaq (to be justified) was a very poor rendering of the Aramaic by the translator.
(See his Studies in Daniel, pp. 41-42, 79-80) Thus in all three languages, the language in which Daniel wrote, and the Greek and Latin translations of that text, the KJV is confirmed.
Both the LXX and the Vulgate use the future passive - "the sanctuary shall be cleansed" - to render the thought of the Aramaic.
The end of the 2300 days in 1844, therefore marks the beginning of the process which shall end in a cleansed sanctuary.
Daniel 7 outlines the events to be fulfilled on earth during the Heavenly judgment before the Ancient of Days. A continuum is noted "The Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom." (7:22)
We are now at the end of the period as outlined in Daniel 7. The devil would rob us of the certainty of the truth committed in sacred trust to the Advent Movement by seeking to destroy the fundamental pillars of the sanctuary doctrine as based in the shadowy types and prophecies of the Old Testament.
The simple refining of our perceptions of the truth leaves unmoved the basic foundation.
The Blending of the Light -- What relationship is,there between "the judgment was set" in Daniel 7, "the sanctuary shall be cleansed" in Daniel 8, and the typical Day of Atonement in Leviticus 16?
It should be obvious that there is a relationship between Daniel 7 and 8. The prophecies are parallel. When one understands the textual background for Daniel 8:14, and the parallel choice of words in the LXX between Daniel 8:14 and Leviticus 16:30, one can sense there is a relationship there. But what is the relationship between Daniel 7 and Leviticus 16?
This is not so obvious. Yet the sanctuary doctrine as understood by the Seventh-day Adventist Church in the past decades stands or falls over this relationship. It is our failure to come to grips with this issue that has given cause for the assaults which the "new theology" advocates have made against the sanctuary teaching.
Our failure to recognize the distinct differences between the prophecy of Daniel 7 and the typical ritual of Leviticus 16 has not helped the cause of truth.
Daniel 7 does reveal a "judgment," definitely pre-Advent, before which the "little horn" power is arraigned.
This arraignment is before the assembled hosts of Heaven. (Dan. 7:9-10)
On the other hand, the typical services of the sanctuary were connected with a covenant. The covenant is primary; the services secondary.
The text in Hebrews does not say "The worldly sanctuary with its ordinances of divine service had also connected with it a covenant." (See Heb. 9:1)
{9:1} Then verily the first [covenant] had also ordinancesof divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
It was the covenant which had "also" the sanctuary with its services.
Just so, Jesus as "the mediator of a better covenant" is also "a minister of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man." (See Heb. 8:6, 2)
{8:6} But now hath he obtained a moreexcellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of abetter covenant, which was established upon betterpromises.
{8:2}A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle,which the Lord pitched, and not man.
The "judgment" of Daniel 7 involves the whole problem of sin and the key players in that problem, while the shadowy ritual of the earthly sanctuary tells how a covenant people must relate to the provision for sin to escape the condemnation of the judgment.
It must be kept clearly in mind that the "little horn" of Daniel 7 is continued in symbolism in Revelation by the first "beast" of Chapter 13, and by the "woman in scarlet" in Chapter 17. Through these symbolisms, runs a continuous thread - "the dragon gave [the beast] his power, and his seat, and great authority." (Rev. 13:2) The final dictum upon "spiritual Babylon" is that "in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth." (Rev. 18:4) The "little horn" stands in the judgment as the embodiment of all wickedness and the symbol of rebellion against God. "The man of sin" in II Thess. 2, another designation of the "little horn", is noted as "the Wicked." (ver.8) The Greek is anomos defined by Thayer as "he in whom all iniquity has as it were fixed its abode." (Greek-English Lexicon of the NT, p. 48)
In the book of Hebrews, the message which God speaks "unto us in a Son" (Heb.1:2 Gr.) is that having become "in all things like unto His bretheren that He might be a merciful and faithful high priest" (2:17), He is first "a son over His own house."(3:6) Then seated as "a priest upon His throne" (Zech. 6:13), He dispenses mercy and "grace to help in time of need." (4:16) This is His first apartment ministry in the Heavenly Sanctuary.
But what happens when the judgment is set and the books are opened before the Ancient of Days? Here the ritual agenda of Leviticus 16 provides the detail. The first entry with blood into the Most Holy Place on the day of Atonement was by the High Priest with the blood of a bullock which was for himself and "for his house." Not only is Jesus "the Lord's goat" but He also "offered Himself." (Heb. 9:14)
{9:14} How much more shall theblood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offeredhimself without spot to God, purge your conscience fromdead works to serve the living God?
Thus the dual entry on the Day of Atonement with "cleansing blood."
The agenda of Leviticus further indicates that the atonement of the Most Holy Place is necessitated "because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins." (16:16) however, no blood of any sin offering ever reached the Most Holy Place during the yearly ritual, but the sins and transgressions of the children of Israel had been recorded in "the books."
What was to be done?
The judgment must begin where and over what sin began.
Sin began at the Throne of God and over the creation of man.
The creation plan intended man to be only "a little while inferior to the angels." (Heb. 2:7 margin)
But in sin man fell even lower than the "inferior" position. Now can God bring an end to sin, and carry out His original plan and none of the angelic host become jealous as did Lucifer?
The judgment is set in the presence of that assembled host. (Dan. 7:10) Jesus coming with His sacrifice asks not only pardon full and complete for His covenant people, but a seat upon His throne. Was His sacrifice sufficient to grant this request?
The next step of the agenda was the blood of the Lord's goat.
This was God's sacrifice. (See Gen. 22:8)
{22:8} And Abraham said, My son, Godwill provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so theywent both of them together
Here the lots had been cast, a choice had been made. Standing in the Court was the other goat, representing Azazel. Could God roll back on him the sins of His Son's "house"? Again the assembled host must respond, for they, too, had cast their lot, made their choice. Was the cost of Calvary sufficient so that God having paid the price could do with "sins" as He so chooses?
Another question must be settled. What about the "uncleanness" of the "children of Israel?" In the agenda of the ritual service, this was the last act of the atonement. {Lev. 16:19-20) Is the "decree" for the removal of the uncleanness then entered to be carried out at the time indicated in Daniel 7:13-14?
The second phase of the ritual agenda was concerning the registry on the horns of the Alter of Burnt Incense.
Here has been made during the year the record of corporate confession. In Daniel 7, none could be found for the "little horn." Of this "horn" under the symbolism of "Jezabel," Jesus declared, "I gave her space to repent ... and she repented not." (Rev. 2:21) the "horn" and all corporate bodies who have not repented during the time allotted for repentance are at this point in the judgment declared "found wanting."
In the time sequence of Daniel 7, this would occur just prior to the coming of the Son of man to the Ancient of Days to receive His kingdom of "saints" - holy ones made holy by His cleansing.
The agenda next indicates a third phase of judgment.
In the Levitical ritual, the final atonement involved a cleansing of the confession of guilt registered on the horns of the Altar in the court. Here in the daily service the individual only was involved. No blood was carried into the sanctuary recording the fact that confession had been made and the penalty paid. The common priest had eaten of the victim. He carried the record in himself. So likewise, Jesus as a common priest having in all things been "made like unto his brethren" offered the sacrifice of Himself and all who place their full dependence in Him are carried in Him. They do not come into judgment but pass from death into life. (See John 5:24, Gr.)
{5:24}Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, andbelieveth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, andshall not come into condemnation; but is passed from deathunto life.
In the typical ritual, the High Priest went in for the people, none even entered the court.
Having completed His work of cleansing, Jesus comes before the Ancient of Days to ask for His kingdom, and His people who have made a covenant with Him by sacrifice. And the Ancient of Days, declares, "Granted." All the host that witnessed the Judgment declare with a loud voice - "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessing." (Rev. 5:12)
The "agenda" of the Judgment as revealed in the shadowy type gives us a clue as to where we are in the stream of time. It is after the corporate phase, the individual cleansing begins. According to Jesus' own prophecy, the times or probation of the nations (corporate bodies) would end with the fulfilling of the sign spoken of in Luke 21:24. This has occurred. This projects for our thinking some interesting questions:
1) Is the "man clothed in linen" (Eze. 9:2-4) now sealing those among the professed house of Israel who have and are afflicting their souls, trusting not in their own works - doing "no work in that same day"? (Lev. 23:28) Do these become in the final hour "His own house" cleansed as represented by the mingled blood of the bullock and the Lord's goat at the Alter of the Court? Do these become marked with the mark of redemption, "the sign of the cross of Calvary"?
2) Has the "man in linen" reported back to the One on the Throne saying - "I have done as thou has commanded me." (Eze. 9:11) Are we at the time when from the Throne will come the command to the "man clothed in linen" to "take coals from between the cherubim" so as to do for His "marked" people as was done for Isaiah? "Eze. 10:1-2;
{10:1} Then I looked, and, behold, in the firmament thatwas above the head of the cherubims there appeared overthem as it were a sapphire stone, as the appearance of thelikeness of a throne. {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.
6-7.
{10:6} And itcame to pass, [that] when he had commanded the manclothed with linen, saying, Take fire from between thewheels, from between the cherubims; then he went in, andstood beside the wheels. {10:7} And [one] cherub stretchedforth his hand from between the cherubims unto the fire that[was] between the cherubims, and took [thereof,] and put[it] into the hands of [him that was] clothed with linen: whotook [it,] and went out.
See also Isa. 6:6-7,
{6:6} Then flew one of the seraphimsunto me, having a live coal in his hand, [which] he hadtaken with the tongs from off the altar: {6:7} And he laid[it] upon my mouth, and said, Lo, this hath touched thy lips;and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged
compare with Rev. 14:5)
{14:5} And in their mouth was found noguile: for they are without fault before the throne of God
The sanctuary teaching is not a "stale, flat, and unprofitable" doctrine, but vibrant with meaning for this very hour.
A fuller understanding of Daniel 7, and its interrelationship with the agenda of Leviticus 16 challenges us today, even as the prophecy of Daniel 8:14 challenged those who perceived that prophecy as pointing to the beginning of the hour of God's judgment in 1844.
"Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart. Rejoice in the Lord, ye righteous; and give thanks to the memory of His sanctuary." (Ps. 97:11-12, margin)
"The Lord has made His peoplethe repository of sacred truth.Upon every individual who has had thelight of present truth devolves the dutyof developing that truth on a higher scale than it has hitherto been done." -- Ellen G. White
--- End --- 1989 Special 3 -- Light From the Throne -- Part 3
*******
Think about it carefully, very carefully. Up until now you might not have ever given any of this a thought. You might be rejecting all of this. You might not want to think that we could be in a time so close that those that are God's individually are being sealed right now, that judgment for you and I might be up.
We know the Bible says--
2 Thess. {2:7} For the mystery of iniquity dothalready work: only he who now letteth [will let,] until he betaken out of the way. {2:8} And then shall that Wicked berevealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit ofhis mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of hiscoming: {2:9} [Even him,] whose coming is after theworking of Satan with all power and signs and lyingwonders, {2:10} And with all deceivableness ofunrighteousness in them that perish; because they receivednot the love of the truth, that they might be saved. {2:11}And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, thatthey should believe a lie: {2:12} That they all might bedamned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure inunrighteousness.
Strong delusion that they should believe a lie...
Because they received NOT the love of the truth...
That they might be damned who believed not the truth.
If we turn from the truth, if we shake our heads and turn away saying we don't want to know all this, we don't want to even try to understand then we condemn ourselves.
God has shown us His plan throughout history and that plan will continue on until the end. We will be accountable for accepting or rejecting the truth in Christ.
Christ is our savior, our redeemer, Christ is our truth.
At some point in history before Christ comes again all those alive in Him when He returns will have been sealed it's inevitable. There will be no last second reprieves when the brightness of the Lord is revealed, by then all that would be saved are sealed.
Isa. {55:6} Seek ye the LORD while he may be found, call yeupon him while he is near: {55:7} Let the wicked forsakehis way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let himreturn unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him;and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
May the Lord help us all and keep us, may we be found in Him, all our hope and trust in Him and His promises now and forever by His grace, amen.
We have, therefore, associated this verse with the Day of Atonement, and have concluded that following the culmination of the 2300 days in 1844, the ministry of Christ would begin in the Heavenly Reality as prefigured in the type.
However, the Hebrew Masoretic text reads sadaq in the Niphal or passive form and means "to be justified or vindicated." (Gesenius)
It is obvious that should the Masoretic text stand without challenge, it would be difficult to associate Daniel 8:14 with Leviticus 16.
The Septuagint (LXX) a Greek translation of the Old Testament older than the manuscripts on which the Masoretic Hebrew text is based reads - "shall be cleansed" - using the future passive form of katharizo.
Here there is a connection with Leviticus 16 for the same word is used twice in verse 30, once as an infinitive, and once using the same passive form as in Daniel 8:14. The Douay Bible following the Latin word used in the Vulgate -- mundabitur - reads also, shall be cleansed."
How can the difference between the Hebrew text and the LXX and Vulgate translations of the Old Testament be reconciled in regard to Daniel 8:14?
Hebrew scholars have long held that the Hebrew portions of Daniel (1-2:4a; 8-12) were translated from Aramaic originals.
This hypothesis was confirmed by the studies of Zimmermann in 1938 and 1939. Building on this, Dr. H. Louis Ginsberg, Sabato Morais Professor of Bible at The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, stated the Aramaic for Daniel 8:14 would read - "the sanctuary will become clean (or be cleansed)"
He maintains that the Hebrew text which led to the Masoretic use of sadaq (to be justified) was a very poor rendering of the Aramaic by the translator.
(See his Studies in Daniel, pp. 41-42, 79-80) Thus in all three languages, the language in which Daniel wrote, and the Greek and Latin translations of that text, the KJV is confirmed.
Both the LXX and the Vulgate use the future passive - "the sanctuary shall be cleansed" - to render the thought of the Aramaic.
The end of the 2300 days in 1844, therefore marks the beginning of the process which shall end in a cleansed sanctuary.
Daniel 7 outlines the events to be fulfilled on earth during the Heavenly judgment before the Ancient of Days. A continuum is noted "The Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom." (7:22)
We are now at the end of the period as outlined in Daniel 7. The devil would rob us of the certainty of the truth committed in sacred trust to the Advent Movement by seeking to destroy the fundamental pillars of the sanctuary doctrine as based in the shadowy types and prophecies of the Old Testament.
The simple refining of our perceptions of the truth leaves unmoved the basic foundation.
The Blending of the Light -- What relationship is,there between "the judgment was set" in Daniel 7, "the sanctuary shall be cleansed" in Daniel 8, and the typical Day of Atonement in Leviticus 16?
It should be obvious that there is a relationship between Daniel 7 and 8. The prophecies are parallel. When one understands the textual background for Daniel 8:14, and the parallel choice of words in the LXX between Daniel 8:14 and Leviticus 16:30, one can sense there is a relationship there. But what is the relationship between Daniel 7 and Leviticus 16?
This is not so obvious. Yet the sanctuary doctrine as understood by the Seventh-day Adventist Church in the past decades stands or falls over this relationship. It is our failure to come to grips with this issue that has given cause for the assaults which the "new theology" advocates have made against the sanctuary teaching.
Our failure to recognize the distinct differences between the prophecy of Daniel 7 and the typical ritual of Leviticus 16 has not helped the cause of truth.
Daniel 7 does reveal a "judgment," definitely pre-Advent, before which the "little horn" power is arraigned.
This arraignment is before the assembled hosts of Heaven. (Dan. 7:9-10)
On the other hand, the typical services of the sanctuary were connected with a covenant. The covenant is primary; the services secondary.
The text in Hebrews does not say "The worldly sanctuary with its ordinances of divine service had also connected with it a covenant." (See Heb. 9:1)
{9:1} Then verily the first [covenant] had also ordinancesof divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
It was the covenant which had "also" the sanctuary with its services.
Just so, Jesus as "the mediator of a better covenant" is also "a minister of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man." (See Heb. 8:6, 2)
{8:6} But now hath he obtained a moreexcellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of abetter covenant, which was established upon betterpromises.
{8:2}A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle,which the Lord pitched, and not man.
The "judgment" of Daniel 7 involves the whole problem of sin and the key players in that problem, while the shadowy ritual of the earthly sanctuary tells how a covenant people must relate to the provision for sin to escape the condemnation of the judgment.
It must be kept clearly in mind that the "little horn" of Daniel 7 is continued in symbolism in Revelation by the first "beast" of Chapter 13, and by the "woman in scarlet" in Chapter 17. Through these symbolisms, runs a continuous thread - "the dragon gave [the beast] his power, and his seat, and great authority." (Rev. 13:2) The final dictum upon "spiritual Babylon" is that "in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth." (Rev. 18:4) The "little horn" stands in the judgment as the embodiment of all wickedness and the symbol of rebellion against God. "The man of sin" in II Thess. 2, another designation of the "little horn", is noted as "the Wicked." (ver.8) The Greek is anomos defined by Thayer as "he in whom all iniquity has as it were fixed its abode." (Greek-English Lexicon of the NT, p. 48)
In the book of Hebrews, the message which God speaks "unto us in a Son" (Heb.1:2 Gr.) is that having become "in all things like unto His bretheren that He might be a merciful and faithful high priest" (2:17), He is first "a son over His own house."(3:6) Then seated as "a priest upon His throne" (Zech. 6:13), He dispenses mercy and "grace to help in time of need." (4:16) This is His first apartment ministry in the Heavenly Sanctuary.
But what happens when the judgment is set and the books are opened before the Ancient of Days? Here the ritual agenda of Leviticus 16 provides the detail. The first entry with blood into the Most Holy Place on the day of Atonement was by the High Priest with the blood of a bullock which was for himself and "for his house." Not only is Jesus "the Lord's goat" but He also "offered Himself." (Heb. 9:14)
{9:14} How much more shall theblood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offeredhimself without spot to God, purge your conscience fromdead works to serve the living God?
Thus the dual entry on the Day of Atonement with "cleansing blood."
The agenda of Leviticus further indicates that the atonement of the Most Holy Place is necessitated "because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins." (16:16) however, no blood of any sin offering ever reached the Most Holy Place during the yearly ritual, but the sins and transgressions of the children of Israel had been recorded in "the books."
What was to be done?
The judgment must begin where and over what sin began.
Sin began at the Throne of God and over the creation of man.
The creation plan intended man to be only "a little while inferior to the angels." (Heb. 2:7 margin)
But in sin man fell even lower than the "inferior" position. Now can God bring an end to sin, and carry out His original plan and none of the angelic host become jealous as did Lucifer?
The judgment is set in the presence of that assembled host. (Dan. 7:10) Jesus coming with His sacrifice asks not only pardon full and complete for His covenant people, but a seat upon His throne. Was His sacrifice sufficient to grant this request?
The next step of the agenda was the blood of the Lord's goat.
This was God's sacrifice. (See Gen. 22:8)
{22:8} And Abraham said, My son, Godwill provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so theywent both of them together
Here the lots had been cast, a choice had been made. Standing in the Court was the other goat, representing Azazel. Could God roll back on him the sins of His Son's "house"? Again the assembled host must respond, for they, too, had cast their lot, made their choice. Was the cost of Calvary sufficient so that God having paid the price could do with "sins" as He so chooses?
Another question must be settled. What about the "uncleanness" of the "children of Israel?" In the agenda of the ritual service, this was the last act of the atonement. {Lev. 16:19-20) Is the "decree" for the removal of the uncleanness then entered to be carried out at the time indicated in Daniel 7:13-14?
The second phase of the ritual agenda was concerning the registry on the horns of the Alter of Burnt Incense.
Here has been made during the year the record of corporate confession. In Daniel 7, none could be found for the "little horn." Of this "horn" under the symbolism of "Jezabel," Jesus declared, "I gave her space to repent ... and she repented not." (Rev. 2:21) the "horn" and all corporate bodies who have not repented during the time allotted for repentance are at this point in the judgment declared "found wanting."
In the time sequence of Daniel 7, this would occur just prior to the coming of the Son of man to the Ancient of Days to receive His kingdom of "saints" - holy ones made holy by His cleansing.
The agenda next indicates a third phase of judgment.
In the Levitical ritual, the final atonement involved a cleansing of the confession of guilt registered on the horns of the Altar in the court. Here in the daily service the individual only was involved. No blood was carried into the sanctuary recording the fact that confession had been made and the penalty paid. The common priest had eaten of the victim. He carried the record in himself. So likewise, Jesus as a common priest having in all things been "made like unto his brethren" offered the sacrifice of Himself and all who place their full dependence in Him are carried in Him. They do not come into judgment but pass from death into life. (See John 5:24, Gr.)
{5:24}Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, andbelieveth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, andshall not come into condemnation; but is passed from deathunto life.
In the typical ritual, the High Priest went in for the people, none even entered the court.
Having completed His work of cleansing, Jesus comes before the Ancient of Days to ask for His kingdom, and His people who have made a covenant with Him by sacrifice. And the Ancient of Days, declares, "Granted." All the host that witnessed the Judgment declare with a loud voice - "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessing." (Rev. 5:12)
The "agenda" of the Judgment as revealed in the shadowy type gives us a clue as to where we are in the stream of time. It is after the corporate phase, the individual cleansing begins. According to Jesus' own prophecy, the times or probation of the nations (corporate bodies) would end with the fulfilling of the sign spoken of in Luke 21:24. This has occurred. This projects for our thinking some interesting questions:
1) Is the "man clothed in linen" (Eze. 9:2-4) now sealing those among the professed house of Israel who have and are afflicting their souls, trusting not in their own works - doing "no work in that same day"? (Lev. 23:28) Do these become in the final hour "His own house" cleansed as represented by the mingled blood of the bullock and the Lord's goat at the Alter of the Court? Do these become marked with the mark of redemption, "the sign of the cross of Calvary"?
2) Has the "man in linen" reported back to the One on the Throne saying - "I have done as thou has commanded me." (Eze. 9:11) Are we at the time when from the Throne will come the command to the "man clothed in linen" to "take coals from between the cherubim" so as to do for His "marked" people as was done for Isaiah? "Eze. 10:1-2;
{10:1} Then I looked, and, behold, in the firmament thatwas above the head of the cherubims there appeared overthem as it were a sapphire stone, as the appearance of thelikeness of a throne. {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.
6-7.
{10:6} And itcame to pass, [that] when he had commanded the manclothed with linen, saying, Take fire from between thewheels, from between the cherubims; then he went in, andstood beside the wheels. {10:7} And [one] cherub stretchedforth his hand from between the cherubims unto the fire that[was] between the cherubims, and took [thereof,] and put[it] into the hands of [him that was] clothed with linen: whotook [it,] and went out.
See also Isa. 6:6-7,
{6:6} Then flew one of the seraphimsunto me, having a live coal in his hand, [which] he hadtaken with the tongs from off the altar: {6:7} And he laid[it] upon my mouth, and said, Lo, this hath touched thy lips;and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged
compare with Rev. 14:5)
{14:5} And in their mouth was found noguile: for they are without fault before the throne of God
The sanctuary teaching is not a "stale, flat, and unprofitable" doctrine, but vibrant with meaning for this very hour.
A fuller understanding of Daniel 7, and its interrelationship with the agenda of Leviticus 16 challenges us today, even as the prophecy of Daniel 8:14 challenged those who perceived that prophecy as pointing to the beginning of the hour of God's judgment in 1844.
"Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart. Rejoice in the Lord, ye righteous; and give thanks to the memory of His sanctuary." (Ps. 97:11-12, margin)
"The Lord has made His peoplethe repository of sacred truth.Upon every individual who has had thelight of present truth devolves the dutyof developing that truth on a higher scale than it has hitherto been done." -- Ellen G. White
--- End --- 1989 Special 3 -- Light From the Throne -- Part 3
*******
Think about it carefully, very carefully. Up until now you might not have ever given any of this a thought. You might be rejecting all of this. You might not want to think that we could be in a time so close that those that are God's individually are being sealed right now, that judgment for you and I might be up.
We know the Bible says--
2 Thess. {2:7} For the mystery of iniquity dothalready work: only he who now letteth [will let,] until he betaken out of the way. {2:8} And then shall that Wicked berevealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit ofhis mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of hiscoming: {2:9} [Even him,] whose coming is after theworking of Satan with all power and signs and lyingwonders, {2:10} And with all deceivableness ofunrighteousness in them that perish; because they receivednot the love of the truth, that they might be saved. {2:11}And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, thatthey should believe a lie: {2:12} That they all might bedamned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure inunrighteousness.
Strong delusion that they should believe a lie...
Because they received NOT the love of the truth...
That they might be damned who believed not the truth.
If we turn from the truth, if we shake our heads and turn away saying we don't want to know all this, we don't want to even try to understand then we condemn ourselves.
God has shown us His plan throughout history and that plan will continue on until the end. We will be accountable for accepting or rejecting the truth in Christ.
Christ is our savior, our redeemer, Christ is our truth.
At some point in history before Christ comes again all those alive in Him when He returns will have been sealed it's inevitable. There will be no last second reprieves when the brightness of the Lord is revealed, by then all that would be saved are sealed.
Isa. {55:6} Seek ye the LORD while he may be found, call yeupon him while he is near: {55:7} Let the wicked forsakehis way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let himreturn unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him;and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
May the Lord help us all and keep us, may we be found in Him, all our hope and trust in Him and His promises now and forever by His grace, amen.
Monday, December 29, 2008
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.
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.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
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.
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.
Friday, December 26, 2008
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)