Christ in the Heavenly Sanctuary


(George Davidovich) #62

Investigative Judgement

Frank,
I don’t think the problem was the use of a specific Bible translation or a specific and unique link, solely to Leviticus 16, there is more context being included as you can see in this statement below (emphasis mine):

"Use of Sadaq in Daniel 8:14. The niphal use of the root sadaq in Daniel 8:14 is unique in the Old Testament. Though the basic meaning of the root sadaq is “to be right,” “to justify,” “to restore,” the semantic range of this root includes the meaning “to cleanse.” This is evident from (1) the use of sadaq with taher(“to cleanse,” “to purify”; e.g., in Job 4:17) in synonymous parallelism and zakah (“to cleanse,” “to purify”; e.g., in Job 15:14), (2) the translation of sadaq in several versions, and (3) the hithpael use of the root sadaq (the hithpael, like the niphal, is passive or reflexive) in Genesis 44:16”.

The final analysis of this very narrow but deep factor was that Ford did not give “enough due weight” to the meaning “to cleanse” in the context of Daniel 8:9-14.

On Point number 2, which is really so much more critical in weighting the pros and cons of Ford’s position is what you stated as: [quote=“frank_merendino, post:61, topic:15900”]
the 2300 days itself relies largely on importing the year for a day calculation from essentially two or three other unrelated places in the OT. This is then laid on this text as the key to unlock a two millennia long time period and fulfillment.
[/quote]

Historicism, the “disputed numerology”, as you called it, is not applied randomly or at will as mentioned but rather systematically. The day as a symbol for a year is only applied to prophecy that has symbols (e.g. Animals, horns, Etc.), it goes back to at least 200 AD where some Jewish sages recognized it even before Christians I believe, and In contrast Desmond Ford’s “Apotelesmatic Principle” can hardly be called, mainstream, or widely accepted except maybe by Sir Francis Bacon (a.k.a. Shakespeare et al…), let alone a method of prophetic interpretation. It proposes that anything is possible, meaning prophetic events can be non-events, repeated at will, they can happen in the future, in the past, Etc., with no external or methodical controls to justify a specific position.

Although I am not in favor of Dr. Ford’s theology I believe he is an honorary Christian and I hope to see him in Heaven someday.


(Frankmer7) #63

Yes, George. I appreciate your charitable attitude towards him. However, what I have shared does not come from reading Ford’s writings. It is more from my own observations from trying to read the text in its immediate context… literary and historical. To me, the conclusion that Daniel 8 is referring to a judgment commencing in 1844 AD just doesn’t fit the context well, if at all.

Thanks…

Frank


(George Davidovich) #64

Frank:
I realize that thanks to Alcasar and Ribera Historicism it is not the most popular method of prophetic interpretation now, but you may find it refreshing.


#65

So did William Miller and many of his followers, the hard way.


(Selby magagula) #66

We have plenty in Africa.


(Steve Mga) #67

There is going to come a time when people are going to ask this question of prophets.
HOW MUCH OF WHAT THEY “SEE”, “ARE SHOWN” IS REAL? or HOW MUCH IS
REPRESENTATIVE OF AN IDEA OR TEACHING?

these questions, i believe, are what 1st world peoples are asking about all the written
materials describing what is claimed to have “SEEN”, claimed to “HAVE BEEN SHOWN”.
In Revelation – ARE there ACTUAL BOOKS? Maybe it was a very advanced COMPUTER
program. Or something else.
DOES Jesus ACTUALLY wear a described High Priest outfit of 3500 years ago? IS God like
Adam and Eve were, and not needing clothes as we know them at all? Perhaps some of
the things described, seen are REPRESENTATIVE of an Idea, a Truth. Many times a
"picture" or “drawing” is more helpful than written, spoken words. Or a short play with
actors present large concepts and ideas.

In Revelation John begins his story indicating there is a semblance of a Jewish Temple in
heaven, with God sitting on the “mercy seat of the ark”. At the end of the book, chapt 22,
John reveals there is NO TEMPLE UP THERE. God and Jesus are the TEMPLE. It is
portable, it is their BODIES that make up the Temple, as they stroll about the streets of
gold talking with and greeting everyone.
SO!! What to we do with Jesus moving from the “Table of Shewbread” in the "holy place"
to the “MOST holy place”? And Satan taking Christ’s place on the “Table of Shewbread”?
This is purported to be a REAL Activity, NOT a representative activity?
HOW do we explain THIS to Inquiring Minds who Want To Know??
And, still help them keep faith in Ellen G. White?
A lot of this began with the “corn field” vision, and the DayStar Extra.


#68

It ALL begins with WHO your faith is in. You spelled Jesus wrong.


(Frankmer7) #69

It can be explained that this is apocalyptic literature, a genre that is symbolic. Cities with jeweled walls, lakes of fire, beasts with seven heads and ten horns, Jesus with eyes like flames of fire, harlots, 144,000 people from the twelve tribes of Israel standing on a glass sea, etc., are all vivid symbolism to get across spiritual ideas and realities beyond the material symbols or visions themselves. They simply are not literal. Without understanding the genre, a mess of incomprehension and confusion is created. We happen to pick and choose what is symbolic and what is literal within Adventism. Another mess…

Thanks…

Frank


#70

Digressions to the max. Prophecy, eschatology, history, date setting :calendar:, paranoia, sanctuary object details. decorations…

What needs to be cleaned are the dirty minds of churchgoers.
This is why churches should be a place to go to get your brain washed.:bath:


#71

How can you possibly know this? How do you know the hearts and minds of churchgoers?


(Elmer Cupino) #72

What makes a “dirty mind” and how is it “cleaned?”

Please elaborate…


(George Tichy) #73

Brain washing happens much more often and intensely than many realize…


(George Tichy) #74

That was just an instance of his “digression to the max,” I guess… :wink:


#75

Q1. GIGO from perverted depraved cultures.

Q2. You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. JN 15:3…

not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit TIT 3:5.

Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy—meditate on these things. Phil 4:8

THOUGHT REPLACEMENT THERAPY


(Harry Elliott) #76

Israel’s Sanctuary:
Israel built the Lord a sanctuary so He could dwell with them and yet be isolated from their sins and sinfulness. ( Ex 25:8)

Our sanctuary:
We Adventists, on the other hand, pile all of humanity’s sinful garbage onto interstellar barges and like New Yorkers desecrating the once pristine Atlantic, and we unload them in God’s living room! And we boldly preach that Jesus has to clean the place up.

Is that being respectful?


(Steve Mga) #77

Thought Replacement Therapy —
ELMER–
I say, DON’T THINK ABOUT THAT ELEPHANT!!