The answer to the earlier pioneers primary question was a face saving exercise ie our sanctuary doctrine.
Thanks for putting these up Brenton. Lovely to hear Australian Adventist voices thinking deeply.
Sydney Adventist Forum’s pleasure, Paul. Yes, I agree: it is good to hear Australian voices. Thank you for watching (and commenting).
“Present truth” is true when relevant to contemporary mission requirements, 170 years later it is past truth, not present truth.
Please consider a more up to date translation of Daniel 8:13-14: "…perpetual holy Shabbat will be restored to the Sanctuary the Christian Church, and also for Leviticus 16:5 please consider the following typology: the two “hairy/kids of the goat” represent Esau Jacob, and the ram represents Isaac.
The three represent the triune Day of Atonement sacrifice on Golgotha, Jesus and the two malefactors who represent the Christian Church and the Jewish nation.
This proposal would be very relevant to our mission of reconciliation and restoration of the Biblical Decalogue before the second advent of our Savior Jesus.
I think you have accurately discerned our pioneers intentions in their use of the term, “present truth”. Unfortunately, what they called Present Truth could have been called Present Brainstorming. Storms can be pretty exciting…for a while, but in the long run, all they leave us with is Present Wreckage. Ellen White endorsed a lot more failed dates than most Adventists realize.
What we need now is not more invention but more disciplined study of what the Bible writers actually said. Did Paul say that some Christians find blessing treating some days holy, or did he say that some Christians find blessing treating all days alike? Or did he say not to bad mouth them either way? (Yes and Yes and Yes, (Gal 4:10, Col 2:16, Rom 14:5,6)
Has our church ever paid any attention to Paul’s last admonition? (Oops!)
We can not ignore Daniel 8:13-14, and Leviticus 16:5, we need to extract the relevant truth for our time from these passages.
Seventh Day Adventist movement exists because of these ideas, and our purpose is to make these ideas relevant for the whole Christian Church.
The proposed new interpretation of Daniel 8:13-14 and Leviticus 16:5 in my previous posts is not an invention, the interpretation is supported by Biblical text, and history of the people of God.
This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.