99 Comments

Seventh-day Adventism: Satan will bear your sins.

ellen-g-whiteThe founding false prophetess of Seventh-day Adventism offered the following doosey of a heresy on page 422 of the book The Great Controversy:

It was seen, also, that while the sin offering pointed to Christ as a sacrifice, and the high priest represented Christ as a mediator, the scapegoat typified Satan, the author of sin, upon whom the sins of the truly penitent will finally be placed. When the high priest, by virtue of the blood of the sin offering, removed the sins from the sanctuary, he placed them upon the scapegoat. When Christ, by virtue of His own blood, removes the sins of His people from the heavenly sanctuary at the close of his ministration, he will place them upon Satan, who, in the execution of the judgment, must bear the final penalty. The scapegoat was sent away into a land not inhabited, never to come again into the congregation of Israel. So will Satan be forever banished from the presence of God and His people, and he will be blotted from existence in the final destruction of sin and sinners.

Rank heresy! Utter blasphemy!

Jesus alone had our iniquity placed upon Him (Isaiah 53:6); He who knew no sin became sin on our behalf (2 Corinthians 5:21); and it was Jesus Christ–God in the flesh–who bore our sins in his body on the cross (1 Peter 2:24).

HT: Evangelical Outreach

99 comments on “Seventh-day Adventism: Satan will bear your sins.

  1. Well, if you’re going to make up doctrine, at least this one touches on something in Scripture. That’s a key element if you want people to believe it.

    As Charles Stanley puts it in his book, “Eternal Security” (a mostly good study of the title topic), the parable of the talents shows that some Christians without any good works will spend their time in eternity with Christ in the “outer darkness” of Heaven. He says that the 3rd slave is not cast into hell – he’s called “slave”, which term Paul used to describe himself, so that means the 3rd (wicked) slave is a Christian.

    What poppycock! There is no darkness in Heaven. “Slave” is not a technical term; the context tells us the meaning. Many slaves of darkness are described in Scripture. Wailing and gnashing of teeth are not descriptive of sheep at rest in the Savior, even though Stanley claims those who “escape as by fire” will experience such.

    The wicked author of the SDA ain’t the only one drawing people into falsehood with near-truth. Satan has been misleading folks with such deception since the beginning.

    May God have mercy on us and keep us from evil.

  2. im sorry you feel that way about my church… im sure if you read with a willing heart, seeking Gods guidance you will see that it is the truth! i believe that all that text was trying to say is that our sins will be blamed on the devil who is the father of all lies! not that the devil will redeem us!!! why would he want to!? what kind of christian doctrine would tell its believers that the devil has redeemed us from our sins!? that is not what we believe, only Christ can redeem us but that does not put the blame of our sin on him for Christ is incorruptable!!! i hope you understand this, im only 17 soo i dont have as much theological information but i do believe that it is the truth and hope that i have explained it in a way thats adequate despite my inferiority to you. God Bless you

  3. Dear Mimi:

    Thank you for stopping by and thank you for your comment.

    You said, “i believe that all that text was trying to say is that our sins will be blamed on the devil who is the father of all lies!”

    This is not what EGW was saying here. Read it again. She was using the reference of the old Jewish Scapegoat taking the sins of the people, then equating that to Satan, “upon whom the sins of the truly penitent will finally be placed.” Nothing about blaming him for anything, but clearly placing Satan in the position that Jesus actually took. This is very, very disturbing, and it should be very alarming to you.

    You also said that, “. . . only Christ can redeem us but that does not put the blame of our sin on him for Christ is incorruptable.”

    The “blame” for our sin does not fall on Christ. This was the presupposition you used to justify EGW saying our sins would be placed upon Satan. However, our sins were in fact placed upon Jesus because He was the only one that could pay our ransom; our insurmountable debt of sin against a holy God that no man could ever erase by anything we can do.

    Please take a moment and read the following Scripture carefully:

    All of us like sheep have gone astray,
    Each of us has turned to his own way;
    But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all
    To fall on Him. Isaiah 53:6

    He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. 2 Corinthians 5:21

    and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. 1 Peter 2:24

    Sincerely and respectfully,
    - The Pilgrim

    P.S. You may also be interested in these videos.

  4. thanks for your services may god bless you.

  5. I thank God first because he is the auther and the finisher of our faith.May we prayerfully study the old santuary services that where conducted by the Israelites in the old testament all where but a symbolism of the true lamb to come.

  6. Dear Pilgram
    In your haste to discredit Ellen White you have failed to do your home work.
    Seventh Day Adventist and Ellen White are absolute about the truth of Christ being our Saviour and Redeemer from our sins. Christ was always portrayed as the Lamb slaughtered for our sins but He was never portrayed as the scape goat. The scape goat has a totally different role than the lamb or other chosen sacrificial animals accepted for offerings.

    For one to read other’s writings only for the purpose of destroying and tearing down is not a service at all but a disservice to humanity.

    There are so many evil sources dedicated to leading people away from Christ and you attack the children of God? The Seventh Day Adventist do an excellent job and service to declare the true Saviour Jesus Christ.

    Whether you completely agree with someone or not, attack Satan and his deceptions and not other Christians.

    May God arrest you and bless you for His true service.

  7. Dear Stu:

    It’s not haste. SDA does not stand the test of a Scriptural critique.

    And in this particular case, EGW’s doctrine is way off. She is attributing the work of Christ to that of Satan. Where in Scripture do you find this falsehood:

    When Christ, by virtue of His own blood, removes the sins of His people from the heavenly sanctuary at the close of his ministration, he will place them upon Satan, who, in the execution of the judgment, must bear the final penalty.

    For those interested in further info on SDA, check out this documentary and check out ExAdventists.com as well as Good News for Adventists. For more on SDA’s beliefs such as their denial of Hell, the denial of the immortal soul, their belief in soul sleep, and that ever so wicked JW doctrine that Jesus is Michael the Archangel, check out CARM here.

    Sincerely,
    - The Pilgrim

  8. Hi :)
    I have a question. I know someone that is into the SDA belief system but at times it seems that they believe in the same things I believe but I am very concerned about what I can do to witness to this person. He always sends me this reading:

    trumpetcallofgod.com….

    For some reason I don’t see any Bible scriptures within the text and I want to be able to witness to him about Jesus Christ being the Messiah not just a prophet or angel.

    Thank you :)

  9. Jamila,

    Lost people need the pure gospel of Jesus – not a critique of their cult’s doctrines.

  10. Jamila:

    As with all clever and (numerically) successful cults, they often sound like they believe what the Scriptures say. And on certain points, they often do. The problem lies in where they depart from God’s word.

    Cults are quick to adapt to any canned “evangelism plan” to reach them with the truth. So as a general rule, what I find advantageous in dealing with any cultist is to: 1) First and foremost understand the Bible, particularly the Gospel, very well (Who God is including His character, attributes, and ways; the supremacy of God’s word; man’s condition and dilemma; the necessity of Christ’s atoning work on the Cross; how Jesus’ sacrifice is applied to man; the new nature and the necessity of faith, repentance, obedience and sanctification), 2) Understand where their beliefs err from the truth of God’s word (But use great care in this, being rock solid in the Bible first, and do so only in prayer and with your full spiritual armor on, that you be not carried away by their deceptions).

    Then, proceed to show them Christ in your life. In engaging others with God’s truth, we must take our example from Jesus, and those in Acts who were led by the Holy Spirit. There is no universal “formula” for this, but we must be sensitive to the leading of the Holy Spirit within us to guide us as He did those in Acts.

    For starters in item #2 above, check out the info on this site regarding Seventh Day Adventism.

    Hope that helps.

  11. In regard to the unbiblical, blasphemous SDA teaching that Satan blots out our sins (in SDA theology, sins are now only conditionally-forgiven until Satan blots them out with his meritorious annihilation), since when is Satan typified to be “without spot or blemish” as BOTH goats needed to be on the annual Day of Atonement? Why could one even remotely entertain the notion that Satan is somehow our final sin-bearer?

    Amazingly and sadly, Seventh-day Adventists claim to have two sin-bearers; namely, Jesus and Satan. Thus, in Adventism, Satan has a salvific role to perform for the saints of all ages. Without Satan finally “blotting out” their conditionally-forgiven sins, there can be no heaven for anyone. This really makes Satan the most important being in our salvation. Can heresy ever get any worse than this?

    The SDA scapegoat teaching would not be possible in biblical Christianity because one’s soul goes to heaven or hell at death. Official Adventism has woven an assorted web of deception–one lie based upon another and one heresy to teach yet another heresy. Only Satan could have created such a system of belief with intentional ambiguity and complexity. It is mind-boggling how the unbiblical SDA beliefs are meshed together to support each other–making dozens of false teachings appear as biblical. It is akin to one telling a lie to cover up yet another lie.

    A former SDA minister,

    Dennis Fischer
    E-mail: dfministries@gmail.com

  12. Last week Rose Publishing (www.rose-publishing.com) came out with a glossy, concise, 14-page, pull-apart pamphlet entitled “Ten Questions and Answers on Seventh-day Adventism.” It also contains a glossary that shows how SDA members use Christian terms but mean something else.

    In just a few minutes, you will grasp the basic problems with the teachings of the Seventh-day Adventist prophetess, Ellen G. White. Instead of reading a whole book about Adventism, this pamphlet suffices for factual information. Simply call 1-800-532-4278 to place your order for 30, 300, or 3,000 copies. Buy ten pamphlets and ask for two more FREE. Unit price is only $3.99.

    Dennis Fischer

  13. I have listened to the videos that portray ex-adventist pastors speaking against the scape-goat doctrine of SDAdventism. If they were once genuine pastors or ministers of our church, and I have no reason to believe they are not, they were either completely ignorant of the true teachings regarding this doctrine, or they were deliberately misconstruing the truth. And statements as made above that Adventists say one thing but mean another is insulting and offensive.
    Allow me to state some absolute facts of that doctrine that somehow, whether ignorantly or deliberately, have been left out of the mix.It would be more helpful to all your readers to judge rightly if you would present our doctrines as we teach them, THEN use the scriptures to pick them apart if you can. But to take quotes out of context as had been done in those videos, and simply state that such’n’such a doctrine is heretical (eg Michael the Archangel) without explaining WHY we believe as we do,THEN explaining why we are wrong, is dishonest.
    So, to the scape goat.
    1. Adventism stands without qualification on Jesus being the sole redeemer, the sole propitiation, the one and only hope and Saviour through His substitutionary death on the cross. He alone bore our sins on Calvary, He through the grace and mercy of God made the way for man to be forgiven and reborn into the glorious kingdom of God and His Son.
    2. The second goat, was not slain in the OT service, and thus made no atonement for anyone.
    3. Satan must be made accountable for not only his own personal sin, but also the sins he caused to be committed by mankind through his deceptions and temptations. When Adam and Eve first transgressed, each blamed someone else. Adam blamed Eve and by inference God for creating her, Eve blamed the serpent. When Eve blamed the serpent God did not rebuke Eve for being wrong, in fact God agreed with her that the serpent must bear some responsibility for having deceived her. While Adam and Eve were also to be made to accept and suffer the consequences of their sin (ie the pain in childbirth etc) the sacrifice of the Lamb made atonement for them; they were clothed by God’s righteousness; their nakedness and guilt were covered; and through repentance and faith in the blood of the Lamb they will be in heaven by our side worshipping and thanking Jesus for His sacrifice. The serpent meanwhile was not covered by that sacrifice. But he will certainly be made to bear responsibility for the part he played in the Garden of Eden, as he will be made to accept responsibility for the part he has played in all the crime and destruction that has come upon this earth since. (John 8:44; Romans 6:16; 1 John 3:8) THIS is what Adventists believe happens to the scapegoat. The part HE HAS PLAYED in the committing of transgression is laid upon him and he is made to bear that burden of guilt, alive, until he is destroyed.
    4. Jesus bore our responsibility.
    5. Satan will bear his own, NOT OURS.
    6. The transaction that brings the sin upon Satan is accomplished AFTER the atonement has been completed for the people.
    7. There is no vicarious atonement involved in Satan’s bearing of his own sin.
    8. We wholeheartedly agree with you that any suggestion or inference that Satan in any degree is OUR sin bearer is abhorrent and absolutely sacrilegious.

    For any ministry such as yours to imply that Seventh Day Adventists believe anything else other than what I have outlined above is at best lacking in good research and study, and at worst dishonest and does damage to those who through believing your inferences may miss a legitimate opportunity to receive Christ through genuine Adventism that would lead them to Christ.

  14. As an ex-Seventh Day Adventist, I can say with absolute certainty that SDA’s do teach that Satan is our sin bearer, as taught by E.G White. Any SDA who denies this doesn’t understand their own belief system. Mrs White is the final authority of all matters of faith & practice in the SDA Church, not the Scriptures!

    Furthermore, they teach that “Sunday observance” is the mark of the Beast, & that during the “Time of Trouble” (Great Tribulation) 7th Day Sabbath observance will be the real test whether one is saved or not. To make matters even worse, the Holy Spirit will be withdrawn during this time, & this little flock of faithful SDA’s will be left all alone not knowing whether they’re saved; it will be a terrible time!

    Another one of Mrs White’s teachings that she claims she got from the LORD, is that an habitual meat eater won’t enter the kingdom of Heaven. I could go on quoting many more of their strange, unbiblical beliefs, but this post would turn into a book.

    Many years ago, as a Seventh Day Adventist, I decided to read the Scriptures for myself, apart from SDA interpretation…I was blown away by what the Scriptures actually said! So many SDA doctrines were totally disolved as I compared them with the Holy Scriptures. I then had a real choice to make…SDA doctrines as authoritavely taught by E.G White or what the Bible actually said…The Bible won hands down!

    Seventh Day Adventism has put on “public face” trying to show that it is just like the rest of us evangelicals, but scratch the surface a little & you’ll discover that they are a cult, with very different beliefs & a different Jesus (2 Cor 11:4) In a nutshell…you go in the front door saved by(false) grace, & out the back door bound up by works. Their god is the Sabbath! That’s their most important doctrine, not Christ!

  15. Nigel,

    Many thanks for your testimony. Anything can be an idol – even a day of the week.

    My former boss had a similar testimony to yours – she was a cradle Catholic. When illness confined her to bed, she read the Bible and was amazes at what her church had hidden from her about Christ. She recovered a bit, with a sweet testimony of the Lord had saved her. She left the cult of Rome, started studying the Bible, joined an evangelical church – and died of the cancer she had. With joy for the Lord she went, with her family in awe and confused.

  16. Nigel, as you profess to be an ex adventist, then I would expect that you must be able to critique my post above regarding the scapegoat with some accuracy and thoughtfulness. Instead however you simply make a generalisation about SDA teaching that clearly contradicts all that I said above. Who is right. I am an adventist. The above is my understanding of the doctrine of the scapegoat. Am I wrong Biblically, or am I wrong regards adventist teaching? Or perhaps both? Please explain how, because nowhere in my post do I suggest in any way shape or form that Satan is OUR sin-bearer. He is held responsible for the part he has played in tempting us, and for his own rebelliousness, but that is all.
    As for the Sabbath comments, it never ceases to astonish me that ex-adventists reject the whole kit and caboodle of adventist teaching. I can understand reticence in accepting the investigative judgement, as that takes a lot more study to to justify Biblically. Although it is there, and we do not need EGW to prove it. But the Sabbath?
    Not just Adventists recognise the Sabbath. There are over 400 churches, independent and denominational, that keep the Sabbath in the US alone.
    And Sunday is not the mark of the beast. Yet. Not until the secular laws demand general observance. But it HAS been a sign or mark of papal authority since the 5th century, and if prophecy is right and the papacy gains global authority as she had in Europe during the dark ages, then you can bet Sunday will be at the forefront of her global ambitions. At that time the issue will be clear. Keep Sunday in recognition and submission to the beast, or keep the Sabbath in recognition and submission to God. Tradition or God’s commandments. Your choice.

  17. “And Sunday is not the mark of the beast. Yet. Not until the secular laws demand general observance. But it HAS been a sign or mark of papal authority since the 5th century, and if prophecy is right and the papacy gains global authority as she had in Europe during the dark ages, then you can bet Sunday will be at the forefront of her global ambitions. At that time the issue will be clear. Keep Sunday in recognition and submission to the beast, or keep the Sabbath in recognition and submission to God.”

    (And some people think I’m confrontational and abrasive)

    The Beast is a person, not an institution. Evidence of this is the fact that, among other things, the Beast is referred to as a person and that he is thrown into the Lake of Fire alive. The Mark of the Beast is a physical symbol imprinted on the hand of the forehead; it is visible, not a metaphysical symbol of doing something else.

    But mostly, either something is the Mark of the Beast or it is not; it does not make a transition into the Mark. So if going to church on Sunday will ever be the Mark, then it must be the Mark right now; especially with the idea of papal authority. Many areas of the U.S., until recently, had laws banning businesses from being open on Sunday; did it become the Mark of the Beast for a while then stop?

  18. You would think that if Christians were commanded to worship on Saturday there would be a mention of it in the New Testament. The best I can remember all of the Commandments are repeated in the New Testament except for the 4th. You would think that somewhere in all of Paul’s writings he would say something like “all you Christians must worship on Saturday or you are in disobedience and breaking the 4th commandment”.

  19. Thanks for the quot from the Great Controversy. Let us look at the Bible, how many gospels are there? By studying carefully you will discover their is just one gospel and Jesus is the centre. The bible teaches the gospel in types and antitypes.
    The Bible presents one gospel from Genesis to Revelation, one plan of salvation for humanity. The Bible calls it “the everlasting gospel” (Revelation 14:6).
    Hebrews 13:20 Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, ….
    “By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice.” Hebrews 11:4.
    “Through faith he [Moses] kept the passover, and the sprinkling of blood.” Hebrews 11:28.
    Your way, O God, is in the sanctuary; Psalm 77:13
    The Significance of the Old Testament Sanctuary Services
    Every element in the Old Testament ritual system was specifically designed by Christ to illustrate His own work in the plan of salvation. Every lamb that was slain prefigured Christ, the Lamb of God, who would be offered for the sins of the world. Everything the priests did pointed to Jesus, our great High Priest in the courts above.
    By contemplating the meaning of the ceremonies he performed, an Israelite could understand the entire gospel of salvation. The gospel of Christ is in the Old Testament illustrated just as clearly as in the New Testament it is proclaimed.

    The tabernacle on earth was patterned after the temple in heaven. It consisted of two apartments, the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place.

    “And let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them.
    According to all that I shew thee, after the pattern of the tabernacle, and the pattern of all the instruments thereof, even so shall ye make it”. Exodus 25:8-9

    The Pattern of the sanctuary:

    • Remind that the wilderness sanctuary was patterned after the heavenly sanctuary.
    • Emphasize that Jesus Christ is the central figure in the heavenly sanctuary.
    • Highlight that the services and symbols of the earthly sanctuary pointed to Christ.

    The central figure of the sanctuary in heaven is Christ. It is around His life, death, and resurrection that the hope of eternal life is based. Thus, the services and symbols used in the sanctuary on earth pointed to Christ, to the beauty of His character, and to His love and justice.

    Everything in the Sanctuary Pointed to Christ
    Christ is the Lamb of God that took away the sins of the world (John 1:29)‏
    Christ is the light of the world that lightens every man (John 1:9-12; 8:12)‏
    Christ is the living bread who came down from heaven to give us eternal life (John 6:32-51)‏
    Christ is the mercy seat (propitiation), through whose redemption we have salvation full and complete (Rom 3:24, 25)‏
    Christ is our intercessor against the accusations of Satan (Hebrews 7:25)‏
    Christ is the veil that bore our sins in His flesh (Hebrews 10:19,20)‏
    The Sanctuary Revealed the Fall and Restoration of Man. In Adam, humanity sinned, was defiled, and condemned to death. In Christ, the same humanity was reconciled to God, cleansed from all defilement, and justified to life (Romans 5:18)‏
    Through faith in Christ, sinners experience salvation. This is the good news of the gospel and the truth of righteousness by faith. All this was revealed in the Sanctuary model given to Moses:

    The Sanctuary was where God met sinners (Ex. 25:22; 29:42, 43)‏
    Today He meets us in Christ (2 Cor. 5:19)‏
    The Sanctuary was where God revealed Himself to sinners (Ex. 29:46)‏
    Today He reveals Himself to us in Christ (John 14:7-9)‏
    The Sanctuary was where God dwelt with sinners (Ex. 25:8; 29:45, 46)‏
    Today He dwells with us in Christ (Matthew 1:23; John 14:23)‏
    The Sanctuary was where God spoke to sinners (Ex. 29:42; Lev. 1:1)‏
    Today He speaks to us in Christ (Hebrews 1:2; John 8:43, 47)‏
    The Sanctuary was where God accepted sinners (Lev. 1:4)‏
    Today He accepts us in Christ (Ephesians 1:6)‏
    The Sanctuary was where God forgave sinners (Lev. 4:20, 26, 31, 35)‏
    Today He forgives us in Christ (Ephesians 1:7)‏

    A study of the sanctuary reveals three steps in the process: sacrifice, intercession, and cleansing.
    Sacrifice
    This step was symbolized in the Old Testament by the daily slaying of animals. A perfect lamb without blemish was required, and sacrificed in the courtyard. Every drop of blood that was shed in those rituals pointed to the sacrifice of Jesus for lost mankind. His death paid the full price for our redemption.

    1. Lamb, 2. Without blemish, 3. killed at twilight, 4. the Lord’s Passover, 5. Don’t break any bones
    The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world; Jn 1:29
    Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: 1 Peter 1:18

    After the penitent sinner has confessed his sins upon the head of the sacrificial animal and taken it’s life (Lev. 4:4,15,24,29) the priest performs one of two kinds of rituals
    1. In the case of the sin offering for a fellow priest, or for the whole congregation, the officiating pries sprinkled some of the blood seven times before the veil in the holy place as well as on the horns of the altar of incense. (Lev. 4:6,7, 17,18, 4:27-33)
    2. In the case of the sin offering for other individuals, the officiating priest sprinkled the blood on the horns of the altar of burnt offering in the court. Pours out the blood at the base of the altar and then he eats some of the flesh of the sin offering. (Lev. 6:26; 10:17) By eating the flesh, the priest became the sin-bearer. “to bear the guilt..to make an atonement for them.”
    Romans 4.7-8
    “Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.”
    Intercession
    This step was symbolized by the daily duties performed by the priests in the holy place, or first apartment of the sanctuary. Incense was continually offered before God, mingled with the prayers of the saints. This represented Christ’s priestly intercession for His people which He began after His ascension to heaven. Through Christ’s first apartment ministry the sinner’s guilt is pardoned, and Christ’s righteousness is imparted to His people.

    Cleansing
    The third step was illustrated once each year in the Old Testament ceremonies. The tenth day of the seventh month was called the Day of Atonement. It was the day on which the sanctuary was cleansed. It was considered the most solemn and significant event of the year. On that day the whole congregation appeared before the Lord that they might be made “at one” with Him. Sins which had been brought to the sanctuary throughout the year were figuratively removed from it on that day. But those who failed to humble themselves before God were cut off from the people.
    On that day the high priest alone appeared before God behind the veil of the Most Holy Place. With him he took the blood of a goat and a censer of coals from the altar of incense. This represented the final phase of Christ’s work in the heavenly sanctuary, performed in “the time of the end.” The work of atonement is not complete until the sanctuary is thus cleansed.
    Scripture references to the Old Testament Day of Atonement include Leviticus 16 and Leviticus 23:27-32. Information on the end-time cleansing of the sanctuary is found in Daniel 8:14; Malachi 3:1-5; and Hebrews 8 and 9.
    Sacrifice is made, the cleansing blood is applied at the mercy seat as well as at the altar of incense. The sanctuary is cleansed. The priest returns from the cleansing of the sanctuary “when he has made an end of atoning for the tabernacle of meeting and the altar” (Lev. 16:20) Then he goes and places ALL the sins upon the goat who is cast far out, forever banned (this goat is not the sacrifice )

  20. So. A 17 yr old Adventist hit the nail on the head from the beginning. The goat represents satan sent off into the wilderness…kinda sounds familiar…like when satan is sent off to roam the dust earth…interesting…and straight forward.

    Remember folks… a prophet is: a teacher, one who has insight and can relate complicated terminology to simple folk. Think about Ellen White as the author of “The Bible for dummies” look in the bible to find…Miriam, deborah, Huldah. etc..approximately 10 mentioned. Also remember that true prophesy is initiated by the Holy Spirit. Which those who give themselves to God all receive in different ways.

    Keep it simple.

    Shane,

    On the Sabbath…
    Read: Matthew 12:8, 12; 24:20; Mark 1:21; 2:27-28; 6:2; Luke 4:16, 31; 6:5; 23:56; Acts 13:14, 42, 44; 15:21; 16:13; 17:1-2; 18:4; Hebrews 4:4, 9-10…then decide…Oh, and remember that the Sabbath was created on the 7th day and not during the Ten Commandments…

    Want another shocker… We die and rest in the ground until Jesus’ return…we don’t float up to heaven or go to hell (which is non-existent – including purgatory). Read carefully 1 Thessalonians 4:16, 17.

  21. James C,

    1) Ellen White is a false prophet and most certainly did not have true revelations from God. She may well have followed other spirits, but they were not the Holy Spirit of God.
    2) Purgatory – non-existent – we agree here.
    3) Hell (non-existent) – sorry, here you are in disagreement with the Word of God. Even the Lord Jesus Christ preached on the matter of hell. Lazarus and the rich man is not a parable, but a recounting of a real account.
    4) Soul-sleep – sorry, once again you have been misled by false teaching.

    5) Most importantly, Satan does not, never has, never will be able to bear our sins. Once again, SDA is preaching heresy of the grossest order.

    The Desert Pastor

  22. Desert Pastor

    The two goats represent Christ and Satan and are a prominent part of the Day of Atonement, preadvent judgment.

    The contest was to determine, in symbol, who was the true Lord. Both Christ and Satan claim this position. The one to whom it belonged would pay the price of sacrifice to redeem His people from sin.

    Just with that…how is Christ the lamb set free(scapegoat) if Christ was sinless? Think about it more until you make a decision on this. I can see the confusion of the “placing sins on it head”
    The blood of Christ’s sacrifice as the penalty for the sins of the children of Israel has already been applied in symbol by the sacrifice of the Lord’s goat and the bull. The justice of God in dealing with the sin problem also assigns punishment to Satan as their tempter.

    Repost from opening blog:
    “When Christ, by virtue of His own blood, removes the sins of His people from the heavenly sanctuary at the close of his ministration, he will place them upon Satan, who, in the execution of the judgment, must bear the final penalty. The scapegoat was sent away into a land not inhabited, never to come again into the congregation of Israel. So will Satan be forever banished from the presence of God and His people, and he will be blotted from existence in the final destruction of sin and sinners.” – E.G.W., The great Controversy

    Mention of “a land not inhabited” confirms our idea that the abyss Satan is consigned to is the earth desolate of people.

    All in all – misplaced semantics for those who only correlate to the cross and not the whole Book and timeline – take a deeper look into Revelations and the end time.

    Hell – I meant to mention how it is temporary and does not exist right now. It is metaphorical to the destruction of satan. Most believe Hell is a place that exists right now and people are burning and suffering in it.

  23. WHO IS YOUR SCAPEGOAT?

    A misinformed and zealous SDA indicated on this thread that I somehow misrepresented the Seventh-day Adventist position on their scapegoat teaching. Apparently, this Adventist has ignored the “inspired” pen of Ellen White on this matter (see GC, pages 422, 485; Test., Vol. 5, p. 475). The revered SDA prophetess, Ellen White, should resolve any question or lingering doubt he or she may have about this unbiblical, blasphemous teaching. In Adventism, God merely forgives one’s sins CONDITIONALLY until Satan finally BLOTS them out through his meritorious annihilation.

    Yes, indeed, Satan must suffer for his own sins, not for the sins of others. However, this is NOT what Seventh-day Adventism teaches. In the truest sense, Adventism teaches that God rewards Satan for his busy deviltry–the more people he can keep from becoming Christians the less suffering he will have to endure for confessed sins that were only conditionally-forgiven. Thus, eternal bliss is ultimately conditional upon the supposed atoning, salvific role of Satan. The idea that the scapegoat (without spot or blemish) represents the devil is a most blasphemous teaching.

    Since when is the devil perfect without any spot or blemish? To entertain the notion, for even a moment, that Satan is the reality of the shadow and represents the PERFECT sacrifice of the scapegoat that was left to die outside the gates of Jerusalem for the sins of Israel annually is most unthinkable and repugnant to any Christ-follower. Satan never, ever atoned for the sins of anyone throughout redemptive history. Indeed, the scapegoat (Lev. 16) represented Jesus who died outside of the gates of Jerusalam. Sadly but truly, Adventism claims for have TWO sin-bearers or scapegoats; namely, Christ and Satan. Does heresy ever get any worse than this? Dear friend, who is your scapegoat? Who died outside of the gates of Jerusalem for His people?

    A former SDA minister,

    Dennis Fischer
    Blog: http://notesfromdennisfischer.blogspot.com
    E-mail: dfministries@gmail.com

  24. “The best modern scholars agree that [Azazel] designates the personal being to whom the goat was sent, probably Satan. This goat was called the scapegoat.” — Smith’s Bible Dictionary (Atonement Day).
    “Azazel is the pre-Mosaic name of an evil personal being placed in opposition to Yahweh.” — Albert Barnes.

    “The words, one lot for Jehovah and one for Azazel, require unconditionally that Azazel should be regarded as a personal being, in opposition to Jehovah. . . The Septuagint rendering is correct, . . . ‘averruncus, a fiend, or demon whom one drives away’ (Ewald). We have not to think, however, of any demon whatever, who seduces men to wickedness in the form of an evil spirit, as the fallen angel Azazel is represented as doing in the Jewish writings (Book of Enoch 8:1; 10:10; 13:1ff.), like the terrible . . . Shibe, whom the Arabs of the peninsula of Sinai so much dread (Seetzen, i. pp. 273-4), 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. The desert and desolate places are mentioned elsewhere as the abode of evil spirits (Isa_13:21; Isa_34:14; Mat_12:43; Luk_11:24; Rev_18:2). The desert, regarded as an image of death and desolation, corresponds to the nature of evil spirits, who fell away from the primary source of life, and in their hostility to God devastated the world, which was created good, and brought death and destruction in their train.” — Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament.
    In English the R.V and A. R. V. the word is rendered “Azazel”, a transliteration of the Hebrew proper name. Among others among the most important Bible translations that have Azazel as a proper name, thus transliterated rather than translated for ‘scapegoat’, we could quote the Spanish Reina Valera, the French Louis Segond, the Italian Nuova Riveduta and the translation into English from the American Jewish Publication Society for Lev. 16:8.
    It appears that if SDAs are indeed heretics as suggested by the owners of this site, God bless them, then we are in good company.

    The opponents of our position point out that both goats had to be “perfect”, which would prove that they both represented Christ. But everything related to the Sanctuary service had to be perfect, no matter what their objective was. The people of Israel would not bring a totally defective, handicapped animal to these solemn services only because in the end it would symbolize Satan. That was contrary to the general mindset of everything pertinent to the Sanctuary services.

    But now, I have my own questions: The Talmud established that the goats should be the most similar to each other possible (Talmud – Yoma 62a) and so that there was no error of which was the goat “for the Lord” and the one “for Azazel” they put a red string on the horn of the one for Azazel, and another around the neck of the goat “for the Lord.” What reason was there for this careful markings, since they had the same final symbolism–Christ’s atoning work?! Why to “cast lots” if both covered the same basic symbolism, representing the same Person–Jesus Christ? Doesn’t this attitude by itself show that they were put in antithesis, with different symbolic purposes?
    ____________________________________________________________________________________

    You claim Denis that I am misguided or misinformed. Might I suggest that you are misrepresenting our position…being an ex adventist minister, whether such misrepresentation is deliberate or the result of poor instruction while at seminary, I will leave for your readers to decide.
    The Adventist position on the full and final propitiation through the atoning work of Christ at Calvary is made abundantly clear in so many of our publications that to claim we teach otherwise is quite frankly irresponsible. Our fundamental beliefs nos 9and 10 make it abundantly clear that we believe, as I think you do, that Jesus is the SOLE source of salvation. There is simply no way to circumvent our conviction that salvation is secured only through the shed blood of Jesus upon the cross of Calvary.

    The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary explains that only placing these factors in due order we can understand that the “goat for Azazel” had no part in the atonement itself. Only when the redeemed ones are guaranteed in heaven, the reprobates are cut out and Satan doesn’t exist anymore, then it could be said that the entire universe is in perfect harmony and unity as it was originally before sin entered it. At that moment we can certainly say in absolute terms that the Plan of Redemption was concluded.

    Differences between two goats: The SDABC shows the immense difference in treatment and meaning between both goats:
    1) The goat for Jehovah was killed (v. 15); the one for Azazel was not (v. 10).

    2) The blood of the first was taken within the Sanctuary and made part of the atonement ritual (vv. 15 e 16); the blood of Azazel was not shed at all, since it was left alive.

    3) After the service in the Sanctuary the fat of the sacrificed animal was burnt on the altar (v. 25); evidently the same didn’t happen to the second goat.

    4) The blood of the one who belonged to the Lord was capable of cleansing (vv. 15 e 16); whoever carried away Azazel was contaminated (v. 26).

    5) Atonement occurred with the first animal; only after that the second was introduced in the scenario (v. 20).

    6) It was only the first “whose blood was brought in to make atonement in the holy place” (v. 27); the second, for Azazel, wouldn’t even enter there.
    The goat who through lot casting was attributed “for Azazel” was left to die in the desert. There is no parallel in the Redemption History with Jesus’ experience of atoning for our sins. He was not left in a desolate place until dying after His sacrifice on the cross. This was already typified in the first goat that was sacrificed by the high priest. Obviously it would be inadmissible to think of a second death to Christ Jesus!

  25. Official Adventism has many contradicting statements about what they believe–notably their statements on salvation. Ellen White, for example, was “all over the road” theologically. Thus, their theology becomes a moving target in many instances. It is not uncommon to find two opposing views, on many topics, in the writings of Ellen White. Therefore, whatever “Spirit of Prophecy” evidence you may present, the Adventist apologists can cite yet another contradicting quotation as also being a “continuing and authoritative SOURCE of truth.” Thus, many Seventh-day Adventists have the luxury of picking and choosing their favorite quotes. Moreover, that is why Adventists have both liberal and conservative theological societies. Participants have been known to even refuse dining together when their meetings were held in the same vicinity.

    The obscure term “Azazel” has generally been considered as a remote place or desert escarpment where the scapegoat died, not referring to a particular person or angel. Moreover, some newer translations do not even use that term. According to Jewish history, it was common to have the scapegoat leap off an escarpment to ensure its death before the one who led out the scapegoat returned and proclaimed the sins of Israel duly removed. This took care of any remote possibility of the scapegoat returning to camp by itself. The news of the death of the scapegoat was eagerly awaited by those who witnessed the leaving of the scapegoat. Just like with Jesus whose atoning death outside the gates of Jerusalem was “once for all” complete, so the shadow (scapegoat) was prefigured as well. Sadly, according to Ellen White, the SDA prophetess, messenger, and co-founder, the atonement was NOT completed at the cross and is still going on in heaven today (i.e., their exclusive, anti-gospel, unbiblical “investigative judgment” alibi). In biblical Christianity, the finished work of Christ on the cross is nonnegotiable.

    His grace still amazes me,

    Dennis Fischer
    Blog: http://notesfromdennisfischer.blogspot.com

  26. D.J. Fischer,

    Bull or Ram – atonement for Aaron and his family.
    Goat #1 with lot cast upon it – atonement for the people.
    Scapegoat – sins placed on it and sent into the wilderness. (no mention in the bible of what happened to the scapegoat after it was released) Also remember the wilderness is a place of trial judgement by God in all contexts or verse in the bible. So Jesus was tried buy Himself?

    Seems to me Christ died(made atonement) for our sins. So then Christ is goat #1
    See, atonement (the process of) is a ritual performed. It is not an event that occurred just once when Jesus died on the cross but prior to His death and on the day of atonement each year, tenth month…seventh day.

    Christ’s work is not finished if you believe in the God-head. Christ lives on and will return to us one day to ,…do what? …the second coming and all related events. “It is done” refers to Gods sacrifice of atonement which was offering up Jesus to pay for our sins – why? to allow Jew and Gentile to be justified freely by faith.

    Read Romans 3:21-31 and pay attention to these words “God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement”

  27. Biblical Christianity teaches that the atonement was completed at the Cross. The salvific atonement of Jesus Christ is complete on behalf of “His people” (Matt. 1:21). Thus, contrary to the teaching of Seventh-day Adventism, our confessed sins are NOT merely conditionally-given due to Satan being the FINAL sin-bearer in his supposed meritorious annihilation that finally blots out all confessed sin. When Jesus exclaimed “It is finished!” it meant exactly that the substitutionary atonement of our “stand-in” was completed on the Cross. We need more than merely an Exemplar, we desperately need a Savior and Substitute. Indeed, Jesus is enough for “His people.” There is absolutely no role for Satan in our salvation.

    “Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son…” (Heb. 1:1 ESV). We no longer need prophets and prophetesses to dispense truth to us when Jesus is our all-sufficient Redeemer. Moreover, under the New Covenant, our awesome and sovereign God now actually indwells His chosen, regenerated people through His Spirit. Together with God’s revealed will for mankind in His written Word, we are fully equipped with everything essential for our salvation. The Bible is God’s voice speaking to us. Truly, salvation is a rescue operation from start to finish. It’s all about Him! Soli Deo Gloria!

    In awe of Calvary,

    Dennis Fischer
    Blog: http://notesfromdennisfischer.blogspot.com

  28. What Denis is saying that all sin has been ultimately atoned for. No new sin will require any form of redemption or act. So, the events in Revelations don’t really point to the true end of ALL sin when satan finally “pays” the price for his manipulative nature of human kind? That would be kind of a distinguished event in Revelations.

    Events still need to occur to end sin for once and all. one specific event is the end of satan who still does what to this day and beyond? If satan’s work is to cause human kind to turn from God what happens to those who (after Christ died for our sins) lack faith or turn away? In all rights, turning away from God is a sin too. Atonement seems to not cover that one?

    I can’t speak for other Christians but I can say the end-time is an event to look forward to.

    I forgot Baptists believe “once saved, always saved” my bad ;) Too bad Paul posed the question: “Why would immortality come through the gospel if all had it from birth?” (or re-birth for that matter…clarifying as baptism) and stated “To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.” (Romans 2:7) Why would we seek immortality if we already had it at birth? Why would God have to give eternal life if it was a birth right? By the way satan does not provide our immortality at his demise rather, we receive it through persistent faith as a gift from God.

    Lets be simple here – Jesus died to atone for our sins….to nullify the atonement process since man kind could not get it right the first time. It was a turning point that lead to removal of requirements other than faith in Jesus Christ “our Lord and savoir”

    Side note: Baptists have many post non-biblical prophets
    Lets name a few…
    Thomas Helwys, John Clarke, William Carey, John Leland, Johann Gerhard Oncken, Lottie Moon, Walter Rauschenbusch, Helen Barrett Montgomery, Nannie Helen Burroughs, Martin Luther King, Jr., Clarence Jordan, T. B. Maston, Henlee Barnette, and Foy Valentine.

    I do note most of the names above are very careful not to declare, in record, as prophets but please note most, if not all prophets had no distinctions as to character, application, or contribution to society from the above and their “works” Lets remember a prophet is a teacher, has insight, and can relate, in simple terms to those who struggle to understand.

  29. James C,

    I am afraid you speak out of ignorance of true church history and more importantly of Baptist history when you name a few “Baptist” post non-biblical prophets. Just because one calls themselves a Baptist does not make them a Baptist anymore than calling yourself a Christian makes you a Christian anymore than standing in a garage makes you an automobile.

    Yes, you are correct that a specific event still needs to take place for sin to end once and for all. However, there is a huge distinction between the ending of sin once for all versus the atonement of sin once for all. These are not the same events as clearly indicated by Scripture. There was one ultimate sacrifice by the Lord Jesus Christ who paid the penalty and became the ONLY atonement ever needed for ALL those who would place their faith in Him alone for their salvation. The atonement is NOT for those whose belief is not in Christ, and who never seek forgiveness and repent from their sins.

    TDP

  30. SDA’s are correct in their view on this based on the Bible. It is an UNBIBLICAL view that atonement ended at the cross. The article of furniture pointing toward the cross, altar of sacrifice, was the FIRST piece of furniture in the process. And these so-called former Adventists, who have gone over to a side of cheap grace, should know better than to mislead about the Adventist position.

  31. quote
    SDA’s are correct in their view on this based on the Bible. It is an UNBIBLICAL view that atonement ended at the cross.

    ………………..
    Really Jane , do you want a few moments to reconsider this before I post some verses.?

    Romans 5:9-11
    Much more then , being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son , much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.
    And not only so , but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ , by whom we have NOW RECEIVED THE ATONEMENT.

    Hebrews 10:10
    By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ ONCE FOR ALL !!!

    Hebrews 10:12
    But this man , after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever , sat down on the right hand of God.

    Hebrews 10:14
    For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

    What is unbiblical is to state that Christ did not finish His work on the cross. It is finished , completed , and it is a gospel that no one can add to , including sabbath keeping or other works.

  32. The answer is very simple. You are misunderstanding EGW.
    Put it this way, Jesus, will not Take “Blame” for your sins. He Paid the price, became ultimate sacrifice for you sins.
    If Satan didn’t exist, who would you be blaming? Only because some way or another, satan has screwed with something which has caused you to sin.
    So Satan will eventually be “blamed” for our sins….Do Not Blame Jesus for your wrong doings. He was sinless, but He died for your transgressions!!!!
    Read your bible and understand it before “Blaming” anyone of heresy!!

  33. It would take an incredible amount of dancing around the mulberry bush to come up with a better fictional account or heresy than what SDA apologists are teaching about Satan being an additional scapegoat. Sadly, Jesus is not enough for our Adventist friends. The biblical truth is that Jesus is our scapegoat who died outside of the gates of Jerusalem (as symbolized on the annual Day of Atonement). Truly, the devil has enough sins of his own to worry about without bearing our sins as well. Indeed, we are individually responsible for our sins. We voluntarily sin. There is no valid excuse for our sins. We can’t say “the devil made me do it.” After all, human beings have a propensity toward sin.

    Moreover, we actually love to sin due to our fallen nature or original sin condition. If we really had a neutral free-will as Adventists insist we have, then we would never commit any sin nor commit treason against the holiness of God. The apostle Paul declared that the very things he didn’t want to do he did anyway. This reveals the extreme depth of the fallen nature of man. The real truth is that man is desperately in need of a Savior and Substitute. Paul further reminds us that no person is righteous–not even one! We don’t even possess the tiniest island of righteousness. We are at the total mercy of our awesome Redeemer. Yes, we certainly need more than merely an Exemplar, we need a Savior and Substitute. Salvation is a rescue operation from start to finish.

    Moreover, both goats (on the annual Day of Atonement) had to be without blemish. Since when can we depict the devil as being without any blemish? According to SDA dogma, Satan has yet an atoning, salvific role to perform for our salvation by finally having to suffer, through his meritorious annihilation, for all our sins. Seventh-day Adventists believe that without Satan ultimately dying for their sins (although confessed) they cannot be finally “blotted out” (see GC, pp. 422, 485; Test., Vol. 5, page 475, etc.). In Adventism, sins are merely conditionally forgiven. So, without the salvific role of Satan, our SDA friends insist that eternal life is unattainable. How can Satan be annihilated to ashes when angels are spirits? What is there to burn up in an angel? Adventists claim that without total perfection in this life, Jesus cannot return to this planet in rebellion (see COL, page 69). Not only is Jesus not enough for our SDA friends, but the Bible is not enough as well. Dear reader, who is your scapegoat? It is my fervent prayer that many Adventists will discover Jesus to be their true Sabbath Rest. It’s all about Him! Soli Deo Gloria!

    In His power and for His glory,

    Dennis J. Fischer
    Blog: http://notesfromdennisfischer.blogspot.com

  34. Again Dennis, you are misrepresenting Adventist teaching. I hope this is not intentional…
    I have given a full and I believe adequate explanation above on the teaching, along with several others, which is quite in contrast to what you claim we teach. Strange is it not…that a so-called ex Adventist pastor would claim we teach one thing despite the unanimous agreement on Adventist visitors to this site to the contrary.
    Allow me to quote a pertinent excerpt from a previous post….

    Satan must be made accountable for not only his own personal sin, but also the sins he caused to be committed by mankind through his deceptions and temptations. When Adam and Eve first transgressed, each blamed someone else. Adam blamed Eve and by inference God for creating her, Eve blamed the serpent. When Eve blamed the serpent God did not rebuke Eve for being wrong, in fact God agreed with her that the serpent must bear some responsibility for having deceived her. While Adam and Eve were also to be made to accept and suffer the consequences of their sin (ie the pain in childbirth etc) the sacrifice of the Lamb made atonement for them; they were clothed by God’s righteousness; their nakedness and guilt were covered; and through repentance and faith in the blood of the Lamb they will be in heaven by our side worshipping and thanking Jesus for His sacrifice. The serpent meanwhile was not covered by that sacrifice. But he will certainly be made to bear responsibility for the part he played in the Garden of Eden, as he will be made to accept responsibility for the part he has played in all the crime and destruction that has come upon this earth since. (John 8:44; Romans 6:16; 1 John 3:8) THIS is what Adventists believe happens to the scapegoat. The part HE HAS PLAYED in the committing of transgression is laid upon him and he is made to bear that burden of guilt, alive, until he is destroyed.

  35. Someone correctly stated that there are only two kinds of Seventh-day Adventists–the deceived and the dishonest. To criticize, expose, and condemn others is not a pleasant task, but when religious teachers enthrone error, and mislead honest people, silence would be unkind and censurable. This why the inspired writers of the New Testament devoted so much time and effort to dispel and expose numerous heresies.

    Getting the Gospel right should be our top priority. Indeed, the Bible (being an all-sufficient and unerring revelation) is God’s voice speaking to us. In light of this fact, we don’t need any modern prophet or prophetess (dead or alive) to dispense unbiblical “truth” to us. The greatest fortress against any heresy is to be thoroughly grounded in Scripture alone (Sola Scriptura). This was the battle cry of the Protestant Reformation, and it still transforms those who are called to be a part of His wonderful family. Soli Deo Gloria!

    His free grace still amazes me,

    Dennis J. Fischer

  36. Dennis Fischer,
    You Wrote:
    “The biblical truth is that Jesus is our scapegoat who died outside of the gates of Jerusalem (as symbolized on the annual Day of Atonement).”

    I am not sure that you understand that feast days (appointed times) of YHWH described in the Torah are date specific. Our Messiah died on Passover/Pesakh as the Passover Lamb. He ascended to our Father and His on the day of the firstfruits/wave sheaf/Reshit Katzir as the firstfruits from the dead. He sent His spirit on to write YHWH’s law upon our hearts on Pentecost/Shavout the same day that YHWH spoke from Mount Sinai His ten words. He fulfilled the exact thing on the exact day. It appears that He wil soon do the same thing for the fall feasts/appointed times that He did in the spring about 2000 years ago. He will fulfill them on the exact day. The day of atonement/Yom Kipur has not been fulfilled. Neither has the the day of blowing of trumpets/Yom Teruah when He will come back for His bride or Tabernacles/Sukkot when He will have the wedding supper of the Lamb with His bride.

    Hebrews 13
    11 For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.
    12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.
    13 Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach.
    14 For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come.

    Please note that the passage above is not about the scape goat/goat for Azazel. It is about the animals whose blood was brought into the sanctuary by the high, not just any, priest. The Azazel goat’s blood was not taken into the sanctuary. The live animal was led into the wilderness by a fit man. This sounds similar:

    Revelation 20
    1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
    2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
    3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

    There were also other animals that were used to sanctify and/or cleanse people/priests that were burned outside the camp. The author of Hebrews may have these in mind also.

    The book of Hebrews is dated to just a short while before Jerusalem’s destruction. This reference about going outside the camp may be an exhortation to get ready to flee and suffer reproach for not staying to fight. Their earthly city was about to not continue. The whole book of Hebrews is a message to Hebrew believers that the temple service is about ready to “vanish away.” It is a reminder that those things are only shadows of the heavenly and are not something to hang onto in the approaching destruction. Messiah had prophesied that this was going to happen and warned His followers to flee when it was eminent. The book of Hebrews was, at least partly, in preparation for the weaning from the Levitical shadow. If there is a correlation between worshiping outside the camp and type in the OT, it seems to be:

    Exodus 33
    7 And Moses took the tabernacle, and pitched it without the camp, afar off from the camp, and called it the Tabernacle of the congregation. And it came to pass, that every one which sought the LORD went out unto the tabernacle of the congregation, which was without the camp.

    or:

    Numbers 19
    9 And a man that is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer, and lay them up without the camp in a clean place, and it shall be kept for the congregation of the children of Israel for a water of separation: it is a purification for sin.

    Maybe both.

    In the book of Revelation we see fulfillments of the Yom Kippur when the millennial reign of Messiah begins and when the final judgment occurs at the end. The first and second resurrection seem to fall on that day. That 1000 year period is the 7th 1000 year period since creation and in it man will be made to rest/cease from his labors/rulership of Earth. This is a 1000 year Sabbath in a sense and it will be a fulfillment of the seventh day Sabbath in a sense if, and that might be a big if, there is such a thing as a type and antitype concerning the Sabbath. This could be what Hebrews is speaking of here:

    Hebrews 4
    9 There remaineth therefore a Sabbath keeping to the people of God.

    You wrote:
    “It is my fervent prayer that many Adventists will discover Jesus to be their true Sabbath Rest.”

    Your statement is neither in the Bible, nor is it alluded to. Though there is a future Sabbath, so to speak, of 1000 years, the passage above in Hebrews is very specific and might be pointing out that Sabbath keeping/sabatismos remains even though the Levitical types and shadows are about to be destroyed. The author of Hebrews is not attempting to allegorize and/or replace YHWH’s commandment with a nondescript resting in Y’shua. The book was written to Messianic Hebrews that were continuing to keep Sabbath and going to the temple and offering sacrifices. The book of Acts makes this clear when the apostles asked Paul to participate in a temple sacrifice to prove that he continued to keep the law. We also know from Acts that there were thousands of Jewish followers of Messiah that were zealous for the law. Sabbath is included in that law that the Apostles, Paul and the Messianic believers continued to keep.

    A Sabbath keeping remaineth. Whether that means that ceasing from doing what we want on the 7th day of the week still remains, or if it means that there is a future 1000 year Sabbath that remains to be kept, or both, there is no such thing as Y’shua being our “Sabbath Rest.” Yes, He gives rest to those that come to Him that are heavy laden. Yes, He gave the commandment to rest on the 7th day to Moses. Yes, He is the lord of the Sabbath, 7th day or otherwise. No, He is not the “Sabbath Rest,” though He commands us to rest and gives us rest. Your allegorical statement in this regard and about Y’shua being the scape goat adds to and takes away from the teaching of scripture. Please reconsider.

    I am not, never have been, nor am I at all likely to become a SDA. The views above are my own. I do not know what E. G. White or SDAs say about these things. I am sure that we can learn even from those that we might consider to be talking donkeys, but we definitely should be careful not to listen to talking snakes. And I wouldn’t want to confuse the two, as one is on YHWH’s side and the other a sworn enemy.

    Luke 9
    49 And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us.
    50 And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.

    Shalom

  37. Jesus did NOT pay the price for Satan’s sins. that’s blasphemy. Jesus is the substitutionary atonement for our sins. He became God in the FLESH so that he could pay for all our sins. Otherwise he would not have been able to pay the price for our sins.

    As far as saying Jesus is not our Sabbath Rest–that’s a totally unbiblical and heretical statement. Yes Jesus is our Sabbath rest and it IS taught in Scripture. Jesus paid for ALL our sins at the cross when he said “It is finished”. I know Jesus is MY Sabbath rest and so do all Christians who are trusting solely in the Finished person and work of Christ by faith….Col.2:16. All the Sabbath was- was a sign that pointed to the (true Sabbath) –Jesus Christ. Colossians 2:16-17, Paul explicitly refers to (the Sabbath) as a shadow of Christ, which is no longer binding since the substance (Christ) has come.

    Jesus’ death at the cross is Complete -he completed ALL the work REQUIRED by God.

    “Because of the perfect obedience of Jesus Christ, which is to say He is the only righteous man to walk the earth having perfectly kept the Law of God, He was fit to be a substitute on our behalf to atone for our sins against God (2 Corinthians 5:21). The theological term for the unblemished Lamb of God taking our punishment for us is substitutionary atonement (Isaiah 53:5; 1 Peter 2:24, 3:18). When sinners turn to God in repentant faith, having trusted in the Person and finished work of Christ (alone), they are immediately declared righteous before the throne of God (Romans 3:21-26). This righteousness is the righteousness of Jesus Christ whereby God looks at the saved sinner as though perfect in His eyes because they are clothed by Christ’s righteousness having been justified freely by His grace. This is justification and it comes by faith alone (Romans 5:1).”

  38. Linda,

    Nowhere does it say that Y’shua is our Sabbath rest. That is a made up term/concept that is not found in the scripture. He is our Passover Lamb. He is our Kinsman Redeemer. He is represented by the the goat that is killed and its blood is sprinkled on the mercy seat on the day of atonement. The Sabbath of YHWH was instituted on the very first 7th day of the week when YHWH blessed and sanctified that day for our resting. There is nothing in scripture that unblesses or unsanctifies what YHWH has blessed and sanctified. The gifts and callings of YHWH are without repentance. He does not go back on His word.

    Romans 11
    29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

    You would do well to realize that all the apostles continued to keep the Sabbath. They did not think that Y’shua somehow negated or replaced the Sabbath and our responsibility to be obedient to our Father. If you will note, the book of Acts is full of examples of Paul and others keeping the feasts and Sabbath and you will find that the time referrences in the New Testament scripture are things like Sabbath, Sabbath days journey, Pentecost, Passover, Feast of unleavened bread, etc. The early believers evidently continued to keep time according to the scriptural calendar and celebrated those days. The following list of scriptures was written to gentile believers. Why didn’t they talk to them according to the calendar of Rome?

    Acts 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
    Acts 20:16 For Paul had determined to sail by Ephesus, because he would not spend the time in Asia: for he hasted, if it were possible for him, to be at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost.
    1 Corinthians 16:8 But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost.
    Acts 1:12 Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day’s journey.
    Acts 13:14 But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down.
    Acts 13:42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.
    Acts 13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.
    Acts 16:13 And on the sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted thither.
    Acts 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,
    Acts 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.
    Acts 27:9 Now when much time was spent, and when sailing was now dangerous, because the fast was now already past, Paul admonished them,
    Acts 12:3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)
    Acts 20:6 And we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days; where we abode seven days.

    Here is a testimony that is recorded in early church history by Eusebius:

    “But the bishops of Asia, led by Polycrates, decided to hold to the old custom handed down to them. He himself, in a letter which he addressed to Victor and the church of Rome, set forth in the following words the tradition which had come down to him:

    ‘We observe the exact day; neither adding, nor taking away. For in Asia also great lights have fallen asleep, which shall rise again on the day of the Lord’s coming, when he shall come with glory from heaven, and shall seek out all the saints. Among these are Philip, one of the twelve apostles, who fell asleep in Hierapolis; and his two aged virgin daughters, and another daughter, who lived in the Holy Spirit and now rests at Ephesus; and, moreover, John, who was both a witness and a teacher, who reclined upon the bosom of the Lord, and, being a priest, wore the sacerdotal plate. He fell asleep at Ephesus.

    And Polycarp in Smyrna, who was a bishop and martyr; and Thraseas, bishop and martyr from Eumenia, who fell asleep in Smyrna. Why need I mention the bishop and martyr Sagaris who fell asleep in Laodicea, or the blessed Papirius, or Melito, the Eunuch who lived altogether in the Holy Spirit, and who lies in Sardis, awaiting the episcopate from heaven, when he shall rise from the dead?

    All these observed the fourteenth day of the passover according to the Gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith.

    And I also, Polycrates, the least of you all, do according to the tradition of my relatives, some of whom I have closely followed. For seven of my relatives were bishops; and I am the eighth. And my relatives always observed the day when the people put away the leaven. I, therefore, brethren, who have lived sixty-five years in the Lord, and have met with the brethren throughout the world, and have gone through every Holy Scripture, am not affrighted by terrifying words. For those greater than I have said ‘We ought to obey God rather than man.’

    He then writes of all the bishops who were present with him and thought as he did. His words are as follows:

    ‘I could mention the bishops who were present, whom I summoned at your desire; whose names, should I write them, would constitute a great multitude. And they, beholding my littleness, gave their consent to the letter, knowing that I did not bear my gray hairs in vain, but had always governed my life by the Lord Jesus.’”

    So according to Polycrates, all the early churches that were not corrupted by Rome continued to keep the Passover the way that John the apostle had taught them to keep it…on the fourteenth day of the first Biblical month “according to the Gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith.” Polycrates, who was appointed confront Victor, bishop of Rome, concerning this matter was at the end of his life and it was about 150 years after Messiah’s death. The eastern churches were still keeping Passover instead of the pagan Roman Catholic Easter Sunday.

    So even though Y’shua fulfilled Passover as our Passover Lamb, they still felt that it was correct to keep Passover and pointed to the apostle John and those that were taught by him. Paul says the same:

    1 Corinthians 5
    7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
    8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

    Evidently Messiah’s fulfillment did not change the practice of observing YHWH’s feasts/appointed times.

    Shalom
    ————————-
    Linda,

    And just for the record, I never said, nor do I believe, that Y’shua paid the price for Satan’s sins. And just because he atoned for our sins and there is nothing we can do to be saved or justified doesn’t mean that we are allowed to continue to sin.

    Romans 3
    31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

    Romans 6
    1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
    2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

    Romans 6
    15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

    What is sin?

    1 John 3
    4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

    We can never be justified by keeping the law.

    Ephesians 2
    8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
    9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
    10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

    But we should do the good works that were before ordained (instituted before) for us to walk in. Just because Messiah died for adulterers does not mean that we should continue to commit adultery. Just because Messiah died for Sabbath breakers does not mean that we should continue to break YHWH’s Sabbath. Grace is supposed to empower us to be obedient. Grace teaches us to live righteous and holy lives.

    Titus 2
    11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
    12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
    13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
    14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

    Messiah redeemed us from all iniquity to purify unto Himself a special people that really want to do the good works that were instituted before by YHWH. When we have the attitude that we do not need to or have to obey Him, we are on the verge of sinning willfully and doing despite to the Spirit of grace.

    Hebrews 10
    26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
    27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
    28 He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
    29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

    If we know to do good and do not do it, it is sin. YHWH’s law tells us what things are righteous just and good and what things are sin.

    Romans 7
    7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet…
    12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
    13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid…

    James 4
    17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

    But always remember, we do not obey to get saved or to be justified. We obey because we have been saved and justified and empowered by the Spirit of grace.

    Shalom

  39. In Colossians 2:16-17, the Apostle Paul clearly teaches that Jesus Christ is the reality of the weekly, OT Sabbath shadow. Moreover, it was one of the seven convocations given exclusively to the “sons of Israel” (Lev. 23:1-3). Actually, I have never met a devout Seventh-day Adventist, when duly confronted, that didn’t agree that the Fourth Commandment had distinctive ceremonial shadows pointing the Lamb of God and the Bread of Life. Those who still insist upon observing any shadow pointing to the Cross are diminishing the glory and majesty of Jesus Christ and even denying His reality.

    Repeatedly, SDA dogma takes away the glory and majesty of Jesus Christ. Unlike the other nine commandments of the Decalogue, the weekly Sabbath (Fourth Commandment) is ritual or ceremonial in nature due to its extra sacrificing, fresh showbread placement, and male circumcision requirements to properly observe it. The Jews never considered the Fourth Commandment as a moral law (moral laws are those in effect every nanosecond of time and not merely once a year, season, month, or week). Without ceremonial aspects, the Decalogue could not be considered a true summary of the 613 civil, ritual, moral, and judicial laws of the Torah.

    As with the tithing codes, weekly Sabbath observance is impossible without the Levitical system being fully in place. How can one observe the Jewish Sabbath as an astronaut in orbit or as a resident in places where the sun doesn’t rise or set for months at a time? The SDA organization does not publish a sunset calendar for many areas of the earth (i.e., northern Alaska and Norway, etc.). Obviously, the Jewish Sabbath was never intended to be observed outside of the Ancient Near East. The curving International Dateline is totally man-made. Also, the Mosaic, weekly Sabbath was based entirely upon the monthly New Moon celebration (a lunar Sabbath). Thus, the Sabbath was celebrated on a different day of the week each month. Think about it! It is important to realize that the Israelites didn’t have a copy of Pope Gregory’s calendar pinned to their tent flaps. Truly, when Jesus died, the Sabbath died.

    Resting in Jesus, the true “Sabbatismos” (Heb. 4:1-10; Matt. 11:28-30),

    Dennis J. Fischer
    Blog: http://notesfromdennisfischer.blogspot.com

  40. Dennis,

    You should be informed that the supposed lunar Sabbath is easily shown to be hoax by simply counting 50 days from the morrow after the Sabbath to another morrow after the Sabbath 7 weeks later. There is no way to arrive at 50 days with lunar months being 29.5 days long.

    Israel never kept a lunar Sabbath. Our Messiah kept the Sabbath on the same schedule as the Pharisees and other Jewish people of His time and it was a recurring 7 day cycle that they kept. The lunar Sabbath Idea that you have purported above is a fallacy and a Straw man that is contrary to scripture.

    Shalom

  41. Deuteronomy 16
    9 Seven weeks shalt thou number unto thee: begin to number the seven weeks from such time as thou beginnest to put the sickle to the corn.
    10 And thou shalt keep the feast of weeks unto the LORD thy God with a tribute of a freewill offering of thine hand, which thou shalt give unto the LORD thy God, according as the LORD thy God hath blessed thee:

    Leviticus 23
    15 And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths shall be complete:
    16 Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the LORD.

    The morrow after 7 Sabbaths being complete, starting in the middle of the first month, would be a minimum of 54 days using a lunar sabbath concept. YHWH can count. His math is perfect. It is exactly 50 days from the first day of the week till the first day of the week after seven Sabbaths or after 7 weeks are numbered. This only works with recurring 7 day week. It is obvious that a recurring 7 day cycle is in view in the scripture from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22.

    Shalom

  42. Dennis Fischer,

    I am afraid that you have forgotten what I posted to you months ago here:
    http://defendingcontending.com/2009/02/06/seventh-day-adventism-satan-will-bear-your-sins/#comment-37808

    It would do you good to reread my post. Just click on the above link.

    Now, onto answering you….

    In your recent response you have neglected to fairly or actually deal with any passage of scripture, but have instead only used rhetoric to rally your troops to jump on your bandwagon. Let us dissect your statements above and see what scripture has to say.

    You wrote:
    “In Colossians 2:16-17, the Apostle Paul clearly teaches that Jesus Christ is the reality of the weekly, OT Sabbath shadow. Moreover, it was one of the seven convocations given exclusively to the “sons of Israel””

    Colossians 2
    16 Let no one, then, judge you in eating or in drinking, or in respect of a feast, or of a new moon, or of sabbaths,
    17 which are a shadow of the coming things, and the body (is) of the Christ;
    (Young’s Literal Translation)

    First, By your logic, the rest of the 10 commandments were exclusively spoken audibly to the “Sons of Isreal” and thus it is not for us to worry about committing adultery or stealing. Secondly, notice that the “is” is added and is not in the Greek manuscripts. Thirdly, notice that the phrase is now seen to be correctly read as “the body of Messiah.” This is the same phrase used elsewhere in the NT. Messiah is not the reality or the substance of the shadows. The observances that Paul lists are a shadow of things to come and they are a shadow of the body of Messiah. They are YHWH’s declarations of the exact days that He will interact in exact ways with His bride. These celebrations of His dealings, in the future, with His Bride (The body of Messiah) are just that, future events…a shadow of things to come. They are not past shadows of something that already happened. The passage does not say to not let others judge us for not practicing these shadows. The passage says not to let anyone judge us for respecting these things. But you have done just that, for your wrote:

    “Those who still insist upon observing any shadow pointing to the Cross are diminishing the glory and majesty of Jesus Christ and even denying His reality.”

    Why then did Paul continue to keep these things? Why did the early churches continue to keep these things? Please reread the post above for which I provided the link and this one: http://defendingcontending.com/2009/02/06/seventh-day-adventism-satan-will-bear-your-sins/#comment-37817 , as they provide the scriptural and historical evidence to help you see the fallacy of your above statement.

    Participating in Passover or Pentecost celebrations does not take away from Messiah’s glory. Quite the opposite. They are celebrations of Messiah’s dealings with His bride. They are like rehearsing for a wedding, and not just any wedding, but His wedding to us. What you call communion, and its elements, are shadows. These do not take away from Messiah’s glory when done properly. The strange thing is that it was the third cup of wine at Passover that Messiah proclaimed that cup, known as the cup of redemption, to be the blood of the new covenant. When we partake of this cup we proclaim Messiah’s death till He returns. So every Passover we are proclaiming Messiah’s death till He returns. We are proclaiming that He paid the bride price for His bride. At Pentecost we are proclaiming that He betrothed us to Himself to us. At the feast of Trumpets we are proclaiming that He is returning for us. At the feast of Tabernacles we are proclaiming that He will consummate His marriage with us.

    Shalom

  43. 1Corinthians 5
    8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

    If Paul was saying in Colossians not to keep Sabbath and the other Feasts of YHWH, He was preaching for us to be carnal, by his own declaration in Romans…for Sabbath keeping is part of the “law of God.” He also would contradict His command in 1 Cor. 5. If we cannot bring ourselves to do it, what does it say of our hearts and minds.

  44. Dennis,

    I am having trouble with my posts not posting, so I am trying to break things down into small bites and see if that works. The post above was actually supposed to come at the end of this:

    You wrote:
    “How can one observe the Jewish Sabbath as an astronaut in orbit or as a resident in places where the sun doesn’t rise or set for months at a time?”

    Your statement above falls short in many areas. Here are a just a couple: First off, it is not the “Jewish Sabbath,” it is YHWH’s Sabbath…at least according to scripture. Secondly, should not the questioning be something more like this: Should we move to a place where we might not be able to know when YHWH’s Sabbath is? Should we live in the space station? How can we keep track of time, so as to be obedient to YHWH, if we are stuck in a place where the sun and moon are not good indicators to us of time?

    The questions we ask betray our hearts. Jeremiah says that our hearts are very deceitful. If we ask the wrong questions, we are really only justifying ourselves instead of subjecting ourselves to Messiah’s lordship. Why can we not agree to keep YHWH’s law?

    Romans 8
    7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

    1Corinthians 5
    8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

    If Paul was saying in Colossians not to keep Sabbath and the other Feasts of YHWH, He was preaching for us to be carnal, by his own declaration in Romans…for Sabbath keeping is part of the “law of God.” He also would contradict His command in 1 Cor. 5. If we cannot bring ourselves to do it, what does it say of our hearts and minds.

    Shalom

  45. Dennis,

    You wrote:
    “Unlike the other nine commandments of the Decalogue, the weekly Sabbath (Fourth Commandment) is ritual or ceremonial in nature due to its extra sacrificing, fresh showbread placement, and male circumcision requirements to properly observe it.”

    The Sabbath was instituted at creation. This special day was “sanctified” (Set aside for special purpose) and “blessed.” It was given to mankind at this point. Israel was reminded of this mandate to keep the Sabbath holy (set apart from the other days) in Exodus 16…a great while before the 10 commandments were spoken audibly from Mount Sinai in Exodus 20. There is nothing in that list of ten that is ceremonial. The only reason that stealing and adultery and murder is considered to be about morality, is because YHWH made a rule about these things. His declaration is what makes things moral and immoral. He declared that us doing our own things on His Sabbath is immoral. The ceremonial aspects of Sabbath and the other Set apart days of YHWH were added after Israel refused to listen to YHWH for themselves. It was months later that the Levitical priesthood and its carnal ordinances were added. Israel refused to be YHWH’s holy priesthood, so they were given a priesthood. YHWH does not change. He did the same thing with the Levites that forsook His instructions.

    Hosea 4
    6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

    YHWH does not change. When we reject the knowledge of His law, we can be jeopardizing our priesthood also. This is the kind of lack of knowledge that has the potential to destroys us. The Sabbath is just one of YHWH’s laws that we have forgotten. As a matter of fact, it is the one commandment that specifically admonishes us to…r e m e m b e r…to keep the day holy that YHWH originally made to be holy.

    Shalom

  46. Dennis,

    You wrote:
    “Also, the Mosaic, weekly Sabbath was based entirely upon the monthly New Moon celebration (a lunar Sabbath). Thus, the Sabbath was celebrated on a different day of the week each month. Think about it! It is important to realize that the Israelites didn’t have a copy of Pope Gregory’s calendar pinned to their tent flaps. Truly, when Jesus died, the Sabbath died.”

    The 50 day count in determining Pentecost/Shavuot as related in the scripture is enough to put this myth to rest. (It can never add up to 50 days from the morrow after the Sabbath to the morrow after the Sababth 7 weeks later in a lunar Sabbath system as it gets off by 1.5 days per lunar cycle.) Also Messiah kept the Sabbath on the same day as the Jews did just 2000 years ago. They were not observing a lunar Sabbath, but a continuous 7 day week. If a 7 day cycle was man’s idea, I do not think that our Messiah bowed to any tradition of mere men, as this is one of the main things that He rebuked the religious leaders of His day for doing. They were making YHWH’s “commandments of none effect by their traditions” and “worshiping in vain” by so doing. What are we doing by not keeping YHWH’s Sabbath?

    Funny that you should say that the Sabbath died. I would assume that you would think that the other appointed times of YHWH would have also died when Messiah died too. Well…50 days after His resurrection the Apostles were keeping the feast of Pentecost…and it was on that very day that YHWH met them in a special way…just as was foretold in YHWH’s feast symbolism/shadow. Instructive, don’t you think, that the rest of the NT keeps track of time and distance as it relates to YHWH’s Sabbath and YHWH’s feast days. Interesting that the early church continued to keep those feasts and Sabbath…until Rome took over and made Christianity into a religion. Interesting that Messiah said that he didn’t come to destroy/kill the law. How could something that YHWH declared as a commandment for mankind be destroyed or killed or even un-blessed.

    Isaac blessed Jacob with Esau’s blessing and it could not be reversed. YHWH blessed the seventh day (not four days a month as in lunar reckoning). He cannot go back on His word.

    Romans 11
    29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

    Numbers 23
    19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

    Matthew 5
    17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
    18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
    19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

    So till heaven and earth pass away, we will have no repenting of YHWH having blessed or sanctified the seventh day of the week. Those that continue to keep YHWH’s law and teach others to do the same will be great in the kingdom. Those that say that even the smallest commandment has died and we need not do it….?

    You made reference to Mat 11:28-30…let’s read it.

    Matthew 11
    28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
    29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
    30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

    The only other place in scripture that we have the idea of rest for our souls is in Jeremiah.

    Jeremiah 6
    16 Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.

    Will we say, “We will not walk therein.”? Messiah was walking perfectly in YHWH’s law…sinless. He was walking in the very old path of righteousness. The people that He was speaking to knew the law and the prophets. They knew what He was referring to. The heavy burden of manmade laws and customs that had made the Sabbath, and every other easy/light commandment of YHWH into drudgery, was being contrasted to the purity of YHWH’s commandments. For they are not do difficult for us if we know them and love them. Hmmm…isn’t that what the New Covenant is supposed to do? Write YHWH’s laws in our hearts and minds.

    Jeremiah 31
    31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
    32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
    33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

    If we are correctly participating in the new covenant, we should be able to obey YHWH’s law. If it is in our mouths or inward parts (idiomatic for knowing it), and in our hearts (idiomatic for wanting to do it or loving it), we would find rest for our souls in keeping YHWH’s commandments. It is not too difficult for us. It is not grievous to us.

    1John 5
    3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

    Deuteronomy 30
    11 “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off.
    12 It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’
    13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’
    14 But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.

    Our hearts betray themselves again when we think that YHWH’s law is too difficult to do or that it is some kind of burden. I hope this helps you in more fully understanding the scripture.

    Shalom

  47. Can anyone help me find out why my posts are not being posted or even moderated?

  48. Bo – your large posts keep getting shunted over to the SPAM folder due to their size. By the time I find them, you have already reposted the same info. Keep your comments limited in size and the filters should cooperate.

  49. Chris,

    Thanks for your assistance and allowing this conversation to continue.

    Shalom

  50. Dennis,

    I think I got most of what I wanted to convey spattered in the posts above. Somewhat out of order…but probably you will get my drift and see my points.

    Shalom

  51. There is nothing wrong with keeping the sabbath and the feasts, for he that regards the day regards it unto the Lord. There is everything wrong with judging or condemning those who do not, as is shown by Colossians 2 and Romans 14. This isn’t hard.

    There is nothing wrong with keeping the sabbath and feasts as memorials of our Lord, though the Scriptures do not command us to do so. There is everything wrong with keeping them as bondage, as something that we must do.

    The apostle-led church in Jerusalem neglected to mention sabbath / feasts in giving guidance for Gentile believers (Acts 15). If that had been an error on their part, we would have some kind of clear indication in the text or some very clear teaching in the epistles to straighten it out. The fact that Jewish believers continued to be as Jews to the Jews (I Cor. 9) proves nothing about what the church as a whole should do.

  52. Jon,

    Acts 15 is a discussion about how we get saved. It is not a final decision about what parts of Torah are the only things that believers in Messiah (saved people) are to abide by. As a matter of fact, the decision was predicated upon the fact that the early believers would be able to learn scripture in the synagogue on Sabbath. People did not have bibles in that day, so the only way for them to hear the Word of YHWH was by having access to where it was read every week. There were no New Testament scriptures at that point, but Paul told Timothy to use the scripture (The Law and the Prophets were all that existed.) to perfect his (and those he taught) doctrine, their out living of righteousness and their good deeds. This is, in effect what the apostles told the new believers…start here and learn what scripture says and put it into practice. Lets examine some these things briefly.

    2 Timothy 3
    16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
    17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

    Acts 15
    1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved…
    5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
    6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter…
    11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they…
    19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
    20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
    21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

    These new disciples were not told to not steal or to not take YHWH’s name in vain or to not murder. The truth is that they were not to do these things, but in their situation they were not knowledgeable in some of the details involved in holiness and cleanness. These new converts needed to hear the scripture. They would not be allowed into the synagogue, where the scriptures were, if they were looked upon as idol worshipers or unclean sexually or from blood. In the final analysis, the new believers were given just the bare necessities of scriptural doctrine on holiness and cleanness and were expected to hear the rest of what YHWH’s word taught and put that into practice as they were made aware of it in the synagogue on Sabbath. And one of the things that they would have learned is how to keep YHWH’s Sabbath, and other holy days, holy to Him.

    In the final analysis, we do not get saved by keeping any law or doing any work, but we that are saved are accountable to learn YHWH’s instructions and to do what we know to do on an ongoing walk on the path of righteousness.

    Shalom

  53. Jon,

    You will find that 1 Corinthians 9 is not a proof of, as you say, “Jewish believers continued to be as Jews to the Jews.” The whole context is about how Paul preaches the gospel and not about him changing his actions. We know from Galatians that Paul rebuked Peter for trying to act like a Jew to the Jews that came from James.

    Galatians 2
    11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
    12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.

    The thing that Peter did was to revert to the Jewish oral law of not eating with gentiles. There is nothing in YHWH’s Torah that says to do this sort of thing. Paul did not change to match the Jewish commandments of men when he was around them either. Paul did change the way he preached so as to effectively communicate to whatever audience he was ministering to.

    1 Corinthians 9
    12 If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ…
    14 Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel…
    16 For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel!
    17 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.
    18 What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel.

    Please note that the context of 1 Cor 9 is preaching the gospel.

    1 Corinthians 9
    19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.
    20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
    21 To them that are lawless, as lawless, (being not lawless to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are lawless.
    22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.
    23 And this I do for the gospel’s sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you.

    Did Paul really become lawless in the sense of transgressing or wickedness? That is what the Greek word means in verse 21. Did he become weak in the sense of not being able to lift heavy objects…putting on a false show of humility? Paul made himself a servant of these people, not by changing his walk of righteousness, but by learning about who he was speaking to and laboring to present the truth of the gospel in a way that would benefit the hearers. He did this for the sake of the gospel. (see Acts 17:16-34, Gal. 2:2, 1 Cor 1:22-24)

    To be continued below.

  54. Continued from above.

    1 Corinthians 9
    24 Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain.
    25 And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.
    26 I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air:
    27 But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

    We read above that Paul kept his body in subjection. He didn’t run uncertainly, switching from law keeping to law breaking and back again. Though he preached to others in their vernacular, he continued to strive to be great in the kingdom by keeping YHWH’s commandments. He did not want to one that said “Lord, lord” and be cast away.

    Matthew 7
    21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
    22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
    23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work lawlessness.

    Paul cast out devils. He prophesied and did special miracles. He was not a worker of lawlessness. He thought that it was wrong to act like the Jews expected him to…keeping the oral law. He did the “will of my Father which is in heaven” that is expressed in the very scripture that he told Timothy to do and teach. Paul will be great in Messiah’s kingdom. But to be so rewarded he must of necessity have done and taught all of YHWH’s commandments.

    Matthew 5
    19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

  55. Continued from above.

    And Paul’s confession is that he never broke YHWH’s law.

    Acts 24
    14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:
    15 And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.
    16 And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offence toward God, and toward men.

    Not only did he give mental assent to what was written, but he believed and obeyed YHWH’s law and was “void of offence”…not offending in “any thing at all.”

    Acts 25
    7 And when he was come, the Jews which came down from Jerusalem stood round about, and laid many and grievous complaints against Paul, which they could not prove.
    8 While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.

    And Paul proved that he continued to walk righteously keeping the law…even to the point of offering sacrifices at the Temple.

    Acts 21
    24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.

    He continued to keep the law when he was becoming all things to all men…even when he was ministering to the lawless. He thought that transgressing the law was sin and only a carnally minded person would not be subject to YHWH’s law and he said so in the strongest of terms.

    Romans 3
    31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

    Romans 7
    7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet…
    12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
    13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid…
    14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

    Romans 8
    6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
    7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

    Shalom

  56. Bo – I’ve been willing to allow the conversation to continue because you have been respectful, in accord with our Rules of Engagment. However, the comments sections are meant to be a place of frank and earnest discussion. I would caution you on using our site as platform for the SDA church. If you continue to post numerous, massive comments that end up co-opting the article, I will have to bring this to an end. I appreciate your respect and candor, but I cannot allow our site to become someone else’s platform. Thank much.

  57. Jon,

    You wrote:
    ” There is everything wrong with judging or condemning those who do not, as is shown by Colossians 2 and Romans 14. This isn’t hard.

    There is nothing wrong with keeping the sabbath and feasts as memorials of our Lord, though the Scriptures do not command us to do so. There is everything wrong with keeping them as bondage, as something that we must do.”

    I discussed Colossians 2 above briefly, but there are some things that I think that you are unaware of. Let us look at some context.

    Colossians 2
    4 And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words…
    8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ…
    16 Let no man therefore judge you…
    18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of messengers, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
    19 And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.
    20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
    21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
    22 Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?

    As we can see from the above, the discussion in Colossians is about men deceiving and taking away our reward with enticing words, philosophy, traditions of men, worldly principles, submission to judgments of supposed authorities, and ordinances and doctrines of men. How do the ideas of man spoil us and take away our reward? What reward?

    Matthew 5
    19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
    20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

    Who is it that the early believers had trouble with teaching commandments and doctrines of men? That wanted to exercise authority over their faith? Who could make someones worship vain? That could steal their reward?

    To be continued below.

  58. Continued from above.

    Mark 7
    7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men…
    9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition…
    13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

    The religious leaders were the culprits. Who did Messiah make fools of? Who did he triumph over in every conversation? Who’s authority did he take away?

    Matthew 22
    46 And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.

    Luke 12
    11 And when they bring you before the synagogues and the rulers and the authorities.

    Matthew 21
    43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

    Colossians 2
    15 He disarmed (spoiled) the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in it.
    16 Let no one, then, judge you in eating or in drinking, or in respect of a feast, or of a new moon, or of sabbaths,
    17 which are a shadow of the coming things, and the body of the Christ;
    18 let no one beguile you of your prize, delighting in humble-mindedness and in worship of the messengers,

    So who is not to make rulings about how we keep YHWH’s holy feasts? I bet you can guess the answer. So who is to instruct us in keeping YHWH’s Sabbaths holy or in righteous living or in good works or in doctrine? The very same scripture that the new believers were to hear in the synagogue every Shabbath. The same scripture that Paul told Timothy to use. The traditions, commandments and doctrines of men are not only found in the Jewish religion. They are also found in Christianity. One set of religious authority wants to add thousands of intricacies to YHWH’s instructions on holiness. The other wants to take away from YHWH’s instructions on holiness. Whoever we submit to is who we have made ourselves holy to. Carnal men will convince us to “make the commandments of YHWH or none effect” one way or the other. Is our worship vain?

    Colossians 2:16 does not say it ok to keep or not keep YHWH’s holy days. It doesn’t say that it is wrong to judge someone who is not keeping YHWH’s instructions. It says that man is not allowed to tell us how to keep them, because it robs us of our reward. You are right…”this isn’t hard.” Just read YHWH’s instructions and commit yourself to do what you read.

    Shalom

  59. Chris,

    I am not SDA, never have been, nor will I ever be. I am not attempting to take over, but just discussing the topics that are raised. I am sorry that it takes me so much space to do this. A lot of what I post is just scripture quotes and space between these and my comments. I will try to be more concise.

    Thank you for your allowing me to post so far. I will understand if you cut me off.

    Shalom

    PS. I did not see your post until after I posted the last two of mine.

  60. Would greatly appreciate if you would. Thanks for understanding our position. God bless.

  61. Bo, this should be a simple question.

    Do you believe and teach that circumcision is required for us to be obedient to the Lord? Yes or no. Shouldn’t need a lot of explanation.

  62. Jon,

    A quick note on Romans 14:

    There is nothing in it that even hints at the topic of keeping YHWH’s holy days. It is about vegetarianism vs eating meat and our personal choices involving feasting or fasting. YHWH’s holy days are not personal preferences. He has set some days apart for specific themes of worship with specific rules. He has set some animals apart as our food and others he has prohibited to us. Our personal ideas cannot take precedence over YHWH’s instructions. We are certainly not allowed our personal ideas about food, feasting and fasting come between us and our brothers. Things that are instructed in scripture have always been a matter of fellowship and disfellowship. There are not thousands of denominations for no reason.

    We also are certainly not allowed to make YHWH’s commandments of none effect by our traditions, doctrines, commandments, or our eating and celebrating. Paul ends his discussing in Romans 14 by encouraging us to not go against our consciences. It is sin to do so, but we should always be in YHWH’s word so as to inform our consciences. Who knows, we may be convicted in things that we never realized not too many days hence as we study and converse.

    Shalom

  63. Jon,

    Before I enter into another discussion, could you please give feedback on what I have already posted. I think that it would be considerate for you to do so.

    Matthew 21
    24 And Jesus answered and said unto them, I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I in like wise will tell you by what authority I do these things.

    Shalom

  64. Bo, it’s part of the same discussion. If we are to keep the Law, then we need to be circumcised. Does God expect us to keep the Law, or not? If not, then many of your arguments here are shown to be unfounded. If He does, then we need to be circumcised, but Galatians becomes a wee problem.

    It’s just a simple yes or no that lets me see where you are coming from. I didn’t ask for another discussion.

  65. Wow. i am lost in your posts already Bo and i thought being saved by grace was such a simple (and hard thing) being a miserable sinner myself. What is it, Grace or law or a combination? Abraham was saved by faith long before the law and our Lord Jesus Christ, who is also God,was born flesh, as promised, actually his promise was there from the start of the Bible. I have been reading foxe’s book of martyrs and have been humbled by their faith and courage in being burned alive and tortured for their beliefs from simple faith in the Gospel of Christ, and not being deceived by the world. What more of us do you demand Bo? other than faith and belief in our lord and saviour and not being deceived by satan and the world? Please forgive me if we have a misunderstanding as you have long posts, which have not have not made your Intentions clear in my simple understanding of the Gospel of our lord. If you could simplify message perhaps in a short message?

  66. Jon,

    If you would please respond to my explanations of the passages you brought up and show how my take on those passages is not what the words of those passages say, then I will be happy to discuss more scripture with you. If you think any of what I posted has any merit, I would also appreciate knowing that. I will be off line starting this evening till tomorrow evening, so you can read my posts and respond if you do those sorts of things on Sabbath.

    Shalom

  67. Jon,

    You might want to consider these passages also:

    Galatians 5
    2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.

    1Corinthians 7
    17 But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all churches.
    18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.
    19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.

    Acts 16
    1 Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek…
    3 Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him…

    Did Paul damn Timothy? If Paul ordained that no one get circumcised, why didn’t he follow his own teaching? It just might be a more complicated answer than yes or no.

    But please converse with me on my responses to your first post.

    Shalom

  68. Andrew,

    I am out of time, but I will try to respond to you in a couple of days. Please reread my posts and look at the passages of scripture that I quoted to see if I am misrepresenting them or if maybe we have been led to see them wrongly by commandments, traditions and doctrines of men.

    Shalom

  69. Bo, I’ll not have time to address everything, but some quick comments. First, if we took Acts 15:1 alone, I would accept what you say about it being about how people are saved. But that does not stand alone. In verse 10, Peter very clearly states that these believing Gentiles are disciples, and James in verse 19 says they are “turned to God.”

    So the letter that is being sent in the latter part of the chapter has nothing to do with how a person is saved. It has to do with the fact that Gentile believers will have interactions with those who keep the Law (whether followers of Christ or not) and their life must take that into account. The letter makes no claim to be a complete explanation of all a believer should do, and it is not about how we are saved. It is about how Gentile Christians interact with the demands of the Law in the presence of those who follow the Law (verse 21). It makes no mention of keeping the feasts or the sabbath. Yet, it mentions meat sacrificed to idols, which as Paul says, is just meat.

    Next, circumcision. Circumcision is assuredly a yes or no question, at least as far as the question I asked you. There may be health reasons for circumcision. There may be reasons, such as the case of Timothy, where applying the principles Paul laid out in I Corinthians 9 would lead one to decide on circumcision. But circumcision is manifestly NOT required to please God, as passages you cited demonstrate. Yet, circumcision is one of the least of these commandments, is it not?

    Finally, you said this: “The whole context is about how Paul preaches the gospel and not about him changing his actions.” Yes, and know. The context is assuredly about preaching the Gospel AND about his actions. It is not about Paul modifying his message, but about Paul intentionally limiting his freedom. He was free to be paid by them, but he chose not to exercise that freedom. He was free to be married and have a wife travel with him, but chose not to do so. He was free to live as a Jew, but chose to limit that freedom that he might minister to Gentiles, and free to live as a Gentile but chose to limit that freedom that he might take the Gospel to the Jews.

    It most certainly is about changing his actions. And the fact that Timothy was circumcised is clearly no more than an example of those principles. As to the feasts and sabbath, then, the fact that Jewish believers still observed the Law in these ways proves nothing as to whether this was a requirement. Jewish believers did Jewish things that are not required. You will remember that Paul took a vow at James’ suggestion. This is another example — the Scriptures certainly required no such thing. Yet no one ever suggested that Trophimus should go to the temple or participate in any of the Jewish ceremonies, vows, etc.

    Perhaps I will have time to respond more later.

    Side question: if you are not advocating SDA, why did you take this up on this thread, which has to do with a horrible doctrinal aberration of the SDAs? You gave the impression you were supporting them.

  70. Jon,

    I originally commented on this article when I saw that there was unfair or at least unknowledgeable posts about SDA and scripture, especially the scripture. The scape goat (goat for Azazel) is not symbolic of our Messiah, but of Satan. The book of Enoch has some interesting insight to this. I do not think that Enoch is scripture, but it has merit in cluing us in on early Jewish thought about giants, women cohabiting with angels, where those hybrid beings and those fallen angels reside now. Enoch is quoted at least 2 times by the apostles and there is also evidence that they agreed with other parts of it.

    All this aside, the attack on SDA needs to be level headed and demonstrably scriptural. I think that SDA has much man-made, not to say woman-made, doctrine. It also has some good and thoughtful scriptural insight. It has some real believers and a lot of good people involved in it. There is no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater or needlessly turn those people off to the truth that we have. The most recent posts of mine started with a response to Dennis when he proclaimed that keeping YHWH’s holy days takes glory away from Messiah, failed to recognize that the Sabbath had ceremonial aspects added to it in the Levitical system instead of being part and parcel with it and used the obviously unscriptural idea of a lunar Sabbath to show that SDA and modern Sabbath keeping is not even on what he wrongly thinks was the original Sabbath system. The SDA’s have done their homework on this, as well as sacred name groups and Messianics. The recurring 7 day week is historical and Biblical fact. The day that our culture calls Saturday is the seventh day of the week. There has been nothing in history that has gotten us off track. Here is a pretty complete discussion on the matter of the Lunar Sabbath heresy:

    http://www.eliyah.com/lunarsabbath.html

    Please read my original posts and the ones that I responded to, to see my points.

    http://defendingcontending.com/2009/02/06/seventh-day-adventism-satan-will-bear-your-sins/#comment-37808

    http://defendingcontending.com/2009/02/06/seventh-day-adventism-satan-will-bear-your-sins/#comment-41289

    Shalom

  71. Andrew,

    I realize that long posts can confuse us. I think that long discourses such as the book of Romans do the same if we are not careful. Peter evidently thought that Paul wrote things that were hard to be understood too.

    2 Peter 3
    15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him,
    16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.
    17 You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability.

    Please note that Peter says that both ignorant and unstable people can find themselves twisting what Paul wrote to their own destruction and that we need to be very careful not to carried away with errors from those people that are lawless. The word for lawless in the Greek (athesmos) means: one who breaks through the restraint of law and gratifies his lusts-(from the Online Bible Greek/English dictionary.) In the book of Romans we find a quite a few clarifications from Paul’s own hand that seem to be anticipating the possibility that those that read it might misunderstand his long drawn out explanation. He insists in the strongest language that there are some things that he absolutely is not saying. Some people, that are either ignorant of the teachings of the rest of scripture or that are unstable in walking in submission to our heavenly Father or those who want to live without the restraint of law, tend to ignore these clarification breaks in Romans. Let’s look at a few.

    Ro 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law…
    31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
    So…The law is not null and void to us that have been justified by believing in Messiah.

    Ro 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet…
    12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
    13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid…
    14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
    So…The law tells us what things are sinful and is full of YHWH’s revelation of what He expects of us…but we have trouble obeying this spiritual law because we are carnal.

    Ro 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
    2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?…
    14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
    15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.
    So…We are not allowed to disregard the YHWH’s law, though His grace covers our transgressions of it. YHWH’s Spirit of grace is supposed to empower us to obey not give us license to disobey.

    Ro 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit…
    7 Because the carnal (fleshly) mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
    8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
    So…when we walk in the Spirit we can do and do do the things that the law stipulates and when we walk after the flesh we cannot subject ourselves to YHWH’s law.

    To be continued below.

  72. Continued from above.

    So…Paul does not want us to think for a minute that what he is saying in Romans gives us freedom to transgress YHWH’s law. Our transgressions necessitated the death of YHWH’s Son. How could we ever imagine that it would be acceptable to disregard YHWH’s instructions on righteous living? Maybe we live in a society that is ignorant and unstable that twists what Paul says so that it can continue in sin instead of reading YHWH’s law and repenting of its transgressions.

    Maybe we have been fooled by the doctrines, traditions and commandments of men into making YHWH’s law of none effect…but Paul says, “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid.” (Rom. 3:31) And John says, “sin is the transgression of the law…Whosoever abideth in him (Messiah) does not continue in sin…He that continues in sin is of the devil.” (1 Joh. 3:4-8) And Paul says, “Shall we continue in sin…?God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?” (Rom. 6:1-2) And Messiah says, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law…Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Mat. 5:17-19) And Messiah says, “And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.” (Rev. 22:12-14)

    In summary:

    We are saved by grace, but there are some good works that were ordained long before that we should walk in them. Where do we find them? In what Paul called the scriptures…YHWH’s law.

    Ephesians 2
    8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
    9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
    10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

    2 Timothy 3
    16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
    17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

    Why should we do them? Because Y’Shua died, not only to save us, but to purify us and grace teaches us to do them and YHWH’s Spirit empowers us to do them.

    Titus 2
    11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
    12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
    13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
    14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
    15 These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.

    And I think that I can say these things with all authority.

    Shalom

  73. Continued from above.

    So…Paul does not want us to think for a minute that what he is saying in Romans gives us freedom to transgress YHWH’s law. Our transgressions necessitated the death of YHWH’s Son. How could we ever imagine that it would be acceptable to disregard YHWH’s instructions on righteous living? Maybe we live in a society that is ignorant and unstable that twists what Paul says so that it can continue in sin instead of reading YHWH’s law and repenting of its transgressions.

    Maybe we have been fooled by the doctrines, traditions and commandments of men into making YHWH’s law of none effect…but Paul says, “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid.” (Rom. 3:31) And John says, “sin is the transgression of the law…Whosoever abideth in him (Messiah) does not continue in sin…He that continues in sin is of the devil.” (1 Joh. 3:4-8) And Paul says, “Shall we continue in sin…?God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?” (Rom. 6:1-2) And Messiah says, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law…Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Mat. 5:17-19) And Messiah says, “And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.” (Rev. 22:12-14)

    To be continued below.

  74. Continued from above.

    We are saved by grace…not of works, but there are some works that were ordained long before that we should walk in them.

    Ephesians 2
    8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
    9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
    10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

    Where do we find these things that were ordained before that we should do? In what Paul called the scriptures…YHWH’s law.

    2 Timothy 3
    16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
    17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

    Why should we do these before ordained works? Because Y’Shua died, not only to save us, but to purify us and grace teaches us to do them and YHWH’s Spirit empowers us to do them.

    Titus 2
    11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
    12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
    13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
    14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
    15 These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.

    And I think that I can say these things with all authority.

    Shalom

  75. Bo, I believe in the sufficiency of Scripture. The Book of Enoch is in error, and both goats are symbolic of Christ, for He both died and removed our sins far from us. He died outside the camp. Thus, the two goats symbolise different aspects of His work.

  76. Jon,

    I also believe in the sufficiency of scripture. The book of Enoch may or may not be in error. A lot of it is incomprehensible symbolic apocalyptic writing. The parts that are straight forward are parallel to the brief scriptural accounts. It is quoted in scripture and that I know of does not contradict scripture in it’s discussion of the topics I mentioned.

    Jude quotes Enoch here:
    Jude
    14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
    15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

    He relates what Enoch discusses here concerning the idea of going after strange flesh that the angels in Genesis six did and the estate of those fallen beings.
    Jude
    6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
    7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

    Peter is relating a concept that Enoch discusses here about the same topic.
    1 Peter 3
    19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
    20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

    James relates something that Enoch teaches here:

    James 3
    1 My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.

    These are just the ones that come to mind quickly. Other than that Enoch’s discussion of the fall of the angels and their cohabiting with women is mentioned in Genesis 6.

    Azazel is said to have all sin ascribed to him in regard to the above mentioned saga in the book of Enoch. This is parallel with the Azazel goat having all of the sins of the people placed on it.

    The two goats are named. One is YHWH’s. One is Azazel’s. They are not the same person.

    All this said, I do not look at Enoch as scripture, but just like any historical writing, it can shed light on scripture. The lake of fire was prepared for the devil and his angels. Will he and them not pay for all the sin that they introduced into the world? They cannot repent and be forgiven. Yes Messiah bore our sin and yes He removed our sin from us, but the Azazel goat is symbolic of Satan as one that lives forever with the guilt of sin in a lonely place. If I am wrong about the Azazel goat symbolism, it changes nothing as to the fact that Messiah died for our sin like the YHWH goat symbolizes.

    Shalom

  77. Shleecha and Bo are the same me. I guess I logged in incorrectly and thus the doubled posts. Sorry.

  78. Jon,

    I also believe in the sufficiency of scripture. The book of Enoch may or may not be in error. A lot of it is incomprehensible symbolic apocalyptic writing. The parts that are straight forward are parallel to the brief scriptural accounts. It is quoted in scripture and that I know of does not contradict scripture in it’s discussion of the topics I mentioned.

    Jude quotes Enoch here:
    Jude
    14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
    15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

    He relates what Enoch discusses here concerning the idea of going after strange flesh that the angels in Genesis six did and the estate of those fallen beings.
    Jude
    6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
    7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

    Peter is relating a concept that Enoch discusses here about the same topic.
    1 Peter 3
    19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
    20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

    James relates something that Enoch teaches here:

    James 3
    1 My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.

    These are just the ones that come to mind quickly. Other than that Enoch’s discussion of the fall of the angels and their cohabiting with women is mentioned in Genesis 6.

    Azazel is said to have all sin ascribed to him in regard to the above mentioned saga in the book of Enoch. This is parallel with the Azazel goat having all of the sins of the people placed on it.

    The two goats are named. One is YHWH’s. One is Azazel’s. They are not the same person.

    All this said, I do not look at Enoch as scripture, but just like any historical writing, it can shed light on scripture. The lake of fire was prepared for the devil and his angels. Will he and them not pay for all the sin that they introduced into the world? They cannot repent and be forgiven. Yes Messiah bore our sin and yes He removed our sin from us, but the Azazel goat is symbolic of Satan as one that lives forever with the guilt of sin in a lonely place. If I am wrong about the Azazel goat symbolism, it changes nothing as to the fact that Messiah died for our sin like the YHWH goat symbolizes.

    Hebrews 13
    11 For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.
    12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.
    13 Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach.

    As you can see the reference above is in regard to animals that are burnt outside the camp not let go in the wilderness. These two things come to mind:

    Exodus 33
    7 And Moses took the tabernacle, and pitched it without the camp, afar off from the camp, and called it the Tabernacle of the congregation. And it came to pass, that every one which sought the LORD went out unto the tabernacle of the congregation, which was without the camp.

    or:

    Numbers 19
    9 And a man that is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer, and lay them up without the camp in a clean place, and it shall be kept for the congregation of the children of Israel for a water of separation: it is a purification for sin.

    Shalom

  79. Sorry for the double post again. The second one is correct. I guess I do not exactly know what I am doing in regards to posting.

    Thanks

  80. Bo / shleecha,

    This will in all probability be my last post answering you on this thread. I simply don’t have time to answer everything, you’ve put out so much here. I’m not going to change your mind, that’s pretty obvious. But there are some significant Biblical problems with some of your comments, so I want to answer some of it for others who might read.

    1. Jesus said, “It is finished.” It is false, to say as you did, that the Day of Atonement has not been fulfilled. Hebrews is very clear that the work is finished. Note 7:27, but especially chapters 9 & 10, which refer to the Day of Atonement, and speak of Christ having completed the substance which that day foreshadowed. Thus, the veil of the temple was torn, because the work was finished. The feast of Trumpets has not been fulfilled, but Atonement has.

    2. No man knows the day or the hour of Christ’s return. The Scriptures in no place ever say that the fulfilment of every feast will be date specific. You are correct about the fulfilment of Passover, Firstfruits, and Pentecost. These were fulfilled on these dates, in all probability, for two purposes — so that there would be many witnesses at Jerusalem of these events, and to remove all doubt that the true Jewish faith found its pinnacle in Christ. Since then, the Gospel has gone to the Gentiles, and our faith and our fellowship is supra-Jewish.

    Furthermore, it would be impossible for the fulfilment of both Passover and Atonement to be date-specific. Both required the death of the Saviour, and He died but once, but they fell on different dates.

    3. You misuse “the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.” This can in no way be used to say that God’s expectations and dealings with man never change. He stopped giving manna, and stopped expecting His people to collect it. You cannot rightly use that verse to address the Sabbath. Similarly when you argued about the Sabbath, “YWHW does not change.” Our Lord does not change, but you didn’t pick up manna this morning. That He is unchanging in truth and nature does not mean He does not work in different ways at different times, and place different expectations on His people. Perhaps the best example of this is that He held His people accountable to destroy all the Canaanites, yet held them responsible later for breaking their promise to the Gibeonites. Your argument would state that Saul was doing right in killing Gibeonites, because YHWH does not change and His gifts and calling are without repentance. It is a grievous error to argue in this way.

    4. You mischaracterize the Passover controversy of the early church, but it doesn’t matter. Neither Polycrates nor anyone else has any authority, only Scripture. Polycrates claimed to be following Scripture, but since he cited none, it is irrelevant. His testimony is only useful in refuting false historical claims that all accepted Rome’s authority.. It has no bearing on what we should do.

    5. Your treatment of Colossians 2:16-17 is poor. The word which Young has translated “and” is de, not kai. If Paul had wanted to give the verse the emphasis you claim, he would have used kai — “and.” The word he used is most commonly adversative (“but”). Sometimes it is transitional, and is translated “and” with the sense of “now” (Mt. 1:18 uses “now”, Mt. 10:21 uses “and” in the same sense at the start of the verse, but the later “and” which is strongly connective is kai). You note that “is” is not in Col. 2:17, but Greek, more often than not, does not explicitly state “is”. One classic example is II Timothy 3:16.

    6. You abuse I Corinthians 5:7-8. This passage is not telling them to have a literal Passover celebration with unleavened bread. It is telling them to purify the church.

    7. You said that there were no New Testament Scriptures at the time Paul wrote II Timothy 3. Actually, that was one of the last NT books written. Romans was written long before. So was Colossians. Timothy, in Ephesus, would have had in his possession certainly a copy of Ephesians, almost certainly one of Colossians, and many others. Luke’s writings had been acknowledged as Scripture by Paul, so Timothy probably had a copy.

    8. The Book of Enoch is not quoted in Scripture. Enoch, the seventh from Adam, is quoted, a quotation which had been handed down by the Jews through the years. The Book of Enoch has the same quotation. It can be helpful for understanding what some Jews thought at the time it was written, but it is not worth a lot for understanding what the Lord thought when He gave the Law more than a thousand years earlier. It tells us nothing about azazel. The word is translated as scapegoat in the Septuagint. The Jews never accepted Enoch as Scripture or authoritative in any way.

    10. The scapegoat is not symbolic of Satan. This is grave error.
    A) The scapegoat bears the sins of the people. The Scriptures never say that Satan has borne or will bear our sins. You violate the sufficiency of Scripture by advocating a doctrine that Scripture never teaches. You find it in Enoch.
    B) The Scriptures repeatedly say that Christ bore our sins (Is. 53:11-12, Heb. 9:28; I Peter 2:24), as the scapegoat bore sins on the Day of Atonement.
    C) The scapegoat was to be pure and without blemish. Satan is not, and Christ is.
    D) The scapegoat was to be “let go” in the wilderness. Satan will be confined forever, not set free..

    There is more that could be said. Perhaps I will do a followup post on the symbolism of the scapegoat, for those who are interested in a more Biblical approach to the subject than the one that you, Ellen White, and the Book of Enoch present. There are aspects to the symbolism that haven’t been mentioned on this thread.

    If you run true to form, I expect many long posts citing a lot of Scriptures that either don’t address the point or which you will misconstrue. You multiply words, but unfortunately, I find that you do not multiply truth. I cannot tell whether you are intentionally deceiving or merely badly confused. I hope the latter. But I do not want to continue to interact with you on this topic because you use every reply as a launching point to spread more confusion.

  81. Jon,

    I will respond to your points as you numbered them:

    1. Y’shua said it is finished. And it was. But at the point that He said this He had not died or resurrected. He didn’t go to the Father until after His resurrection. Therefore “It is finished” does not apply to the Day of Atonement/Yom Kippur as this is something that must have happened at least 3 days later by any scriptural view. “It is finished” does not apply to Passover either. His time as a man on earth was finished. He still has much to do one earth in the Messianic kingdom, though.

    2. The appointed times of YHWH are all date specific. The lights in the heavens were set up, at least in part, to declare these appointed times from creation because they were in place from creation. The patriarchs knew of them. They are not Jewish feasts. The ones that we know were fulfilled on earth were fulfilled on the exact day. The book of Revelation is a prophesy of end time and Messianic kingdom events. The stage is the earth and it appears that the time frame of the resurrection of the just and the unjust are on Yom Kippur one thousand years apart. It appears that Satan is removed from the scene on both of these events. Once into the bottomless pit and next into the lake of fire. Both desolate places.

    Yes Messiah only dies once and did that on Passover. Yes He has gone into the heavenly tabernacle and put his blood on the heavenly mercy seat and is now our heavenly high priest. The issue is that in eternity earthly time does not exist. In heaven He is the lamb that was slain from the foundation of the world whether we are referring to the Passover lamb or the goat for YHWH on Atonement. The spiritual reality of these things has always been as far as our earth time is concerned. On earth things are going to happen on the exact day in fulfillment of the prophetic shadows. Trumpets and Tabernacles included.

    3. You have misunderstood my point. It is probably my fault. The Gibeonites are a good example of what I was proposing. The gift or covenant or blessing that YHWH imparted to the Gibeonites was upheld. The only reason that they were exempted is because Israel as YHWH’s ambassador, so to speak, was tricked. But once the deal was made it was to be upheld. It was not to be repented of. Sabbath is the same. It was gifted to us. It was blessed and sanctified from the very beginning. It is part and parcel of YHWH’s covenant. The ten (not nine) commandments is called YHWH’s covenant. That covenant is with Israel. The New Covenant is with Israel. Romans 11 makes it quite clear that we have been grafted into Israel. So does Ephesians 2. We are now partakers of the covenants (Plural) of YHWH. We used to be gentiles, but not any more. We adopted into the household, grafted into the Olive tree and made citizens of the commonwealth of Israel.

    Ro 9:4 Who are ISRAELITES; to whom pertaineth the ADOPTION, and the GLORY, and the COVENANTS, and the GIVING of the law, and the SERVICE of God, and the PROMISES;
    Ro 11:17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
    18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee…
    29 For the GIFTS and calling of God are without repentance.

    Eph 2:11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in TIME PAST Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
    12 That AT THAT TIME ye were without Christ, being aliens from the COMMONWEALTH of Israel, and strangers from the COVENANTS of PROMISE, having no hope, and without God in the world:
    13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes WERE far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ…
    19 Now therefore ye are NO MORE strangers and foreigners, but FELLOWCITIZENS with the saints (Israel), and of the HOUSEHOLD of God;

    YHWH’s bride’s name is Israel. And yes, I know that not all they of Israel are Israel and that only a remnant will be saved.

    Points 4 and following will be answered in the following posts.

  82. Continued from above.

    4. It is a shame that you so easily poo poo Polycrates testimony, as his story is related to us by a Pope friendly author. Eusebius and the Pope disagreed with the churches in Asia. Polycrates says that the apostle John passed down the proper way to keep Passover on to Polycarp and he to those after him. That they deviated not from the gospel. Would John have done such a thing as keep the commandments regarding the appointed times of YHWH after coming to faith in Y’shua? Would he teach others to do the same? You be the judge.

    Mt 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

    1Jo 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
    1Jo 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
    1Jo 3:22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
    1Jo 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.
    Re 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
    Re 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
    Re 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

    Looks like John thought that both faith in Y’shua and keeping YHWH’s commandments was appropriate and that the commandment keeping side of it proved that our faith was genuine. I think James said the same thing. When we look into YHWH’s perfect law and do not obey we deceive ourselves.

    Ps 19:7 The LAW OF YHWH IS PERFECT, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.

    James 1
    22 But be ye doers of the word, and NOT HEARERS ONLY, DECEIVING YOUR OWN SELVES.
    23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
    24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
    25 But whoso looketh into the PERFECT LAW of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

    Ro 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

    John said much the same thing about being deceived by thinking that those that do not do righteousness are righteous.

    1 John 3
    4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for SIN IS THE TRANSGRESSION OF THE LAW .
    5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
    6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
    7 Little children, LET NO MAN DECEIVE you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
    8 He that COMMITETH SIN ISOF THE DEVIL; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

    I am wondering why you bypassed the following quotes that show the early believers keeping the appointed times of YHWH and keeping track of time according to them. There was Roman a calendar that I am sure all the gentiles were used to going by. Why would Paul who was being all things to all men not just use their calendar?

    Acts 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
    Acts 20:16 For Paul had determined to sail by Ephesus, because he would not spend the time in Asia: for he hasted, if it were possible for him, to be at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost.
    1 Corinthians 16:8 But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost.
    Acts 1:12 Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day’s journey.
    Acts 13:14 But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down.
    Acts 13:42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.
    Acts 13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.
    Acts 16:13 And on the sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted thither.
    Acts 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,
    Acts 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.
    Acts 27:9 Now when much time was spent, and when sailing was now dangerous, because the fast was now already past, Paul admonished them,
    Acts 12:3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)
    Acts 20:6 And we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days; where we abode seven days.

    Maybe Polycrates has not bearing on what we should do, but the above passages of scripture certainly do.

    Points 5 and following will be answered in the following posts.

  83. Continued from above.

    5. If you think that you know Greek better than Young and can do a better translation than Young’s Literal Translation, go for it. He, and I, could have chosen “moreover” or “nevertheless” instead of “and.” I will grant you that it could be “but,” but the “is” is added for no other reason than to create a doctrine. The “is” is not there or anywhere else the phrase “body of Messiah” is penned in Greek. Soma means body or a collection into one group. That is all. It does not mean substance. We are not the substance of Messiah. We are His body. So granting you the “but” the sentence becomes, “Let no man therefore judge you…but the body of Christ. The verse could mean that only the body of Messiah, and not the rulers and authorities (Jewish religious leaders), gets to lay down the rules about how to keep YHWH’s feast days. It is obvious that those feast days are a shadow of things to come and not things in the past. They are presently still a shadow of things that are coming. (That is what the Greek says.) These things, like the wedding supper of the Lamb and catching up of the believers, are about the body of Messiah. There is no problem with my view of this passage as it fits with the rest of scripture. Paul even commanded the feast of unleavened bread in 1 Corinthians, so he cannot be saying do not let anyone tell you that you have to keep the feast…because that is exactly what he did.

    6. You wrote: “You abuse I Corinthians 5:7-8. This passage is not telling them to have a literal Passover celebration with unleavened bread. It is telling them to purify the church.” Lets see if you are entirely correct.

    1 Corinthians 5
    8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, NEITHER with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

    Looks like you are only half right. That “neither” in the above verse is the Greek word that means…neither. It is both the physical leaven and the spiritual leaven. Paul goes on to say:

    1Co 16:8 But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost.

    So the feast of unleavened bread was coming up and 50 days from the middle of unleavened bread is Pentecost. And it looks like these Corinthians were up to speed on all this or Paul would have said, “I’ll be at Ephesus until the middle of May sometime.” There is no good reason for Paul to use the scriptural calendar in conversing with gentiles if it isn’t supposed to mean anything to them. Even that the book of Acts, addressed to Theophilus (He sounds like a greek to me.), exclusively uses the word Sabbath instead of Saturday. There is no reason for Paul and Luke to constantly be throwing these things in the faces of these gentile congregations if they are meeting on Sunday and celebrating Easter and Xmas.

    7. Context is everything.

    Ac 16:1 Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek:

    2 Timothy 3
    15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
    16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
    17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

    Do the math. Acts 16 took place in about A.D. 51-52. 2 Timothy was written in A.D. 67. The word “child” means young child or infant. Timothy knew whatever scriptures Paul is speaking of from the time he was a toddler. His mother was a Jewess. According to tradition Timothy died at Ephesus in 97 AD when he was 80 years old. If he was born in A.D. 17, he was 35 in Acts 16…so he was about 50 in 2 Timothy. He was entering manhood at about the time that Messiah was crucified. How much NT scripture was there at that time? Not to mention that Paul called it Holy Scripture…not just scripture. Even if Timothy was only 17 in Acts 16, there was no NT scripture available to him in his early childhood (circa A.D. 35-38) nor for about 10 more years. Paying attention to details matters.

    Points 8 and following will be answered in the following posts.

  84. Continued from above.

    7. part b. You wrote:” Timothy, in Ephesus, would have had in his possession certainly a copy of Ephesians, almost certainly one of Colossians, and many others. Luke’s writings had been acknowledged as Scripture by Paul, so Timothy probably had a copy.” These are speculations…especially when you say “certainly.” Even “probably” is not really reasonable. If you would have said “possibly” I could have agreed. Your main problem is that the scripture that Paul spoke of was known from Timothy’s youth. This could have only been what is called the “Old Testament.”

    8. I am wondering if you have read the book of Enoch. I know that it is not scripture. We do not know how much of the book contains what Enoch wrote or said, or as you put it, was quoted from Enoch. There is some of it that rings true. I brought up the book to show that there has been long standing thought that Azazel is a name associated with the Devil. Your opinion is that “it tells us nothing about azazel.” Some scholars agree with you some with me.

    9. I agree with everything you posted in point nine. You left it out. Just like you leave the 4th commandment out of the ten commandments. I noticed that you have a blog concerning “OMG” and use the 3rd commandment to not take YHWH’s name in vain as your authority. I appreciate that blog. I liked this comment of yours: “I would also add Gen. 4:26, I Kings 8:24, I Chron. 16:8, many other passages, and most notably Zechariah 13:9. God wants us, as His children, to speak His name with reverence, not fail to speak it. To not speak it rejects much of the significance of the Incarnation.” I am wondering if you have any “New Testament” backing that would show that we should continue to hold onto that “Old Testament” law and those “Old Testament Prophets.” You evidently think that we should learn good works and be instructed in righteousness from the Law and the Prophets. It is a shame that you would cast the 4th commandment aside. “Hairetikos” means one who chooses… instead of accepting all of YHWH’s word. The ten commandments all go together. They were written on stone, and in Jer. 31 it was promised that they would be written on our hearts in the New Covenant. The first set of commandments on stone were broken. Then YHWH told Moses to build a container to protect the NEW set that He (YHWH) wrote. That ark is symbolic of our hearts. The second set of 10 had all the same 10 commandments. This symbolism is something you might want to think about. Have we allowed YHWH to place His law upon our hearts or not? Or just parts of it?

    Point 10 to be answered in the following posts.

  85. Continued from above.

    10. Is it grave error to view the goat for Azazel to be symbolic of the Devil? Lets see. I found this yesterday by searching lev.16:8 in the Online Parallel Bible.

    “Azazel is the pre-Mosaic name of an evil personal being placed in opposition to Yahweh. Each goat, having been presented to Yahweh before the lots were cast, stood in a sacrificial relation to Him. The casting of lots was an appeal to the decision of Yahweh (compare Joshua 7:16-17; Joshua 14:2; Proverbs 16:33; Acts 1:26, etc.); it was therefore His act to choose one of the goats for His service in the way of ordinary sacrifice, the other for His service in carrying off the sins to Azazel (see the note at Leviticus 16:22). By this expressive outward sign the sins were sent back to the author of sin himself, “the entirely separate one,” who was banished from the realm of grace.”- Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

    There are many scholars from many denominations and eras of time that written similar things.

    The Jewish authority Dr. M. M. Kalisch.—There can be no doubt whatever that Azazel is a personal, a superhuman, and an evil being—in fact a wicked demon. . . . It was approved of by early Christian writers who identified Azazel with Satan (Origen, C. Cels. VI. 43, p. 305 ed. Spencer; Iren. Adv. Haer. 1. 12; Epiphan. Haeres XXXIV. 11), and by many later and modern scholars.— A Historical and Critical Commentary on the Old Testament, vol. 2, pp. 328, 329.

    “International Standard Bible Encyclopedia.”—By the use of the same preposition . . . in connection with Jehovah and Azazel, it seems natural . . . to think of some personal being.— “Azazel,” vol. 1, p. 343.

    a) You wrote: “The scapegoat bears the sins of the people. The Scriptures never say that Satan has borne or will bear our sins. You violate the sufficiency of Scripture by advocating a doctrine that Scripture never teaches. You find it in Enoch.” No I do not find it in Enoch. Enoch only says that “to Azazel ascribe all sin.” I do not think that the devil bears our sins. I think that Satan is guilty of (deceiving) introducing sin to humanity. He is an accomplice and is culpable in every sin. The book of Enoch simply acknowledges this and equates Azazel with the devil.

    b) You Wrote: “The Scriptures repeatedly say that Christ bore our sins (Is. 53:11-12, Heb. 9:28; I Peter 2:24), as the scapegoat bore sins on the Day of Atonement.” Yes Messiah bore our sins and He died and put His blood on the mercy seat in heaven. He was not taken off into the wilderness never to return by the hands of a fit man (angel). He wasn’t pushed off a cliff into a deep ravine (bottomless pit). He atoned for our sin and paid the price for our sin with His shed blood, but He does not wander off for eternity never to return with our guilt upon Him. He died once for all. He does not continue to bare our sin forever. He bore it…past tense. He is not continually tormented in a solitary place outside the camp.

    Revelation 20
    1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
    2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
    3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more…
    10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

    To be continued below.

  86. Continued from above.

    c) You wrote: “The scapegoat was to be pure and without blemish. Satan is not, and Christ is.” Satan did not start out as Satan. He fell.

    Ez. 28:15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

    Messiah is still without blemish. He does not have sin all over Him.

    d) You wrote: “The scapegoat was to be “let go” in the wilderness. Satan will be confined forever, not set free..” Do you really think that a little goat being “set free” in the wilderness is somehow a good thing? I wonder if the lions or the jackals or even the eagles would get him first. Continuously falling in a bottomless pit is perfect freedom of movement, but not freedom as we would enjoy.

    You wrote: “There is more that could be said. Perhaps I will do a followup post on the symbolism of the scapegoat, for those who are interested in a more Biblical approach to the subject than the one that you, Ellen White, and the Book of Enoch present. There are aspects to the symbolism that haven’t been mentioned on this thread.”

    Maybe we should tell them about the use of lots to decide between people. If Azazel is not also a person why cast lots? If both animals are symbolic of Y’shua there is no need for lots being cast. If the antimessiah is going to impersonate the real Messiah so well that the very elect are almost deceived, it will take divine intervention to tell the difference. “The lot is of YHWH” is what the scripture says. It is a good symbolism in the case for the two goats representing the two options we all have in serving YHWH or Satanl…Y’shua or antimessiah. Only by divine grace have we made the correct choice, or rather have we been told the correct one to cling to and the one to abandon in the wilderness.

    You wrote: “If you run true to form, I expect many long posts citing a lot of Scriptures that either don’t address the point or which you will misconstrue. You multiply words, but unfortunately, I find that you do not multiply truth. I cannot tell whether you are intentionally deceiving or merely badly confused. I hope the latter. But I do not want to continue to interact with you on this topic because you use every reply as a launching point to spread more confusion.”

    Well I guess you were somewhat correct. I wrote long posts and quoted scripture. It is a shame that you do not have very much scripture to prove your points. I think that an honest and open-minded reader will find my use of scripture to be pretty strait forward and correct. My use of scripture at least allows the whole Bible say the same thing instead of contradicting itself. Some people still twist Paul to be in opposition to YHWH’s law. I simply will not do this.

    I would rather multiply words than add to and diminish from YHWH’s word as you have done. I cannot tell whether you are badly confused or if you have deceived yourself by being a hearer of the word but not a doer. I sincerely hope that you will come out of the system that teaches for doctrine commandments of men and into the company of those that live by every word of YHWH instead of just 90%.

    As far as the goat for Azazel, it is obvious that you had your mind made up before you looked into the symbolism closely. There are many good Christian commentators that disagree with your stance. Isn’t it interesting that the author of Hebrews does not even mention the Azazel goat in his painstaking discussion of Messiah being the antitype of the sacrifices for sin, the high priest and the rituals involved in Yom Kippur? Everything else is mentioned. You really need to learn to pay close attention to detail.

    Hebrews 13
    11 For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.
    12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.
    13 Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach.

    “BURNED WITHOUT THE CAMP” does not include the goat for Azazel. Messiah suffered without the camp in fulfillment, if you will, of those animals only. The one animal that was not burned is not included here. If we go out of the camp to where the leftovers of the sacrifices were burned and suffer with Messiah, we are in good company. If we go looking for the goat that was left to wander in the wilderness, we may just take the mark of the beast or the number of his name. Messiah bore our sins once for all. He does not wander forever with the guilt of sin upon Him.

    Shalom

  87. This ought to finish it.
    Continued from above.

    c) You wrote: “The scapegoat was to be pure and without blemish. Satan is not, and Christ is.” Satan did not start out as Satan. He fell.

    Ez. 28:15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

    Messiah is still without blemish. He does not have sin all over Him.

    d) You wrote: “The scapegoat was to be “let go” in the wilderness. Satan will be confined forever, not set free..” Do you really think that a little goat being “set free” in the wilderness is somehow a good thing? I wonder if the lions or the jackals or even the eagles would get him first. Continuously falling in a bottomless pit is perfect freedom of movement, but not freedom as we would enjoy.

    You wrote: “There is more that could be said. Perhaps I will do a followup post on the symbolism of the scapegoat, for those who are interested in a more Biblical approach to the subject than the one that you, Ellen White, and the Book of Enoch present. There are aspects to the symbolism that haven’t been mentioned on this thread.”

    Maybe we should tell them about the use of lots to decide between people. If Azazel is not also a person why cast lots? If both animals are symbolic of Y’shua there is no need for lots being cast. If the antimessiah is going to impersonate the real Messiah so well that the very elect are almost deceived, it will take divine intervention to tell the difference. “The lot is of YHWH” is what the scripture says. It is a good symbolism in the case for the two goats representing the two options we all have in serving YHWH or Satanl…Y’shua or antimessiah. Only by divine grace have we made the correct choice, or rather have we been told the correct one to cling to and the one to abandon in the wilderness.

    You wrote: “If you run true to form, I expect many long posts citing a lot of Scriptures that either don’t address the point or which you will misconstrue. You multiply words, but unfortunately, I find that you do not multiply truth. I cannot tell whether you are intentionally deceiving or merely badly confused. I hope the latter. But I do not want to continue to interact with you on this topic because you use every reply as a launching point to spread more confusion.”

    Well I guess you were somewhat correct. I wrote long posts and quoted scripture. It is a shame that you do not have very much scripture to prove your points. I think that an honest and open-minded reader will find my use of scripture to be pretty strait forward and correct. My use of scripture at least allows the whole Bible say the same thing instead of contradicting itself. Some people still twist Paul to be in opposition to YHWH’s law. I simply will not do this.

    I would rather multiply words than add to and diminish from YHWH’s word as you have done. I cannot tell whether you are badly confused or if you have deceived yourself by being a hearer of the word but not a doer. I sincerely hope that you will come out of the system that teaches for doctrine commandments of men and into the company of those that live by every word of YHWH instead of just 90%.

    As far as the goat for Azazel, it is obvious that you had your mind made up before you looked into the symbolism closely. There are many good Christian commentators that disagree with your stance. Isn’t it interesting that the author of Hebrews does not even mention the Azazel goat in his painstaking discussion of Messiah being the antitype of the sacrifices for sin, the high priest and the rituals involved in Yom Kippur? Everything else is mentioned. You really need to learn to pay close attention to detail.

    Hebrews 13
    11 For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.
    12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.
    13 Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach.

    “BURNED WITHOUT THE CAMP” does not include the goat for Azazel. Messiah suffered without the camp in fulfillment, if you will, of those animals only. The one animal that was not burned is not included here. If we go out of the camp to where the leftovers of the sacrifices were burned and suffer with Messiah, we are in good company. If we go looking for the goat that was left to wander in the wilderness, we may just take the mark of the beast or the number of his name. Messiah bore our sins once for all. He does not wander forever with the guilt of sin upon Him.

    Shalom

  88. Chris,

    Thank you for you patience and grace in going through my posts and serving us all in this “iron sharpening iron” endeavor. Someday I may actually figure out how to sign in correctly and be more patient in waiting for my posts to appear. Please do not despise me for I am a youth the same age that Timothy likely was when Paul told him to not let anyone despise his youth. I am 50 and have been a believer since the age of 17. I’ll know more when I reach the age of elder.

    Shalom

  89. I’ll deal with two of these points which are particularly important beyond this discussion.

    ****
    Colossians 2:17
    Young supplies “is”. Every major translation supplies “is” or “belongs to” between “substance / body” and “Christ”. Every single one. AT Robertson and CH Lenski used “is”.

    All major translations use an adversative for “de”, most translating it “but” — the NIV uses “however”. Lenski says “now”. None use it in the sense that Bo uses it. All use “is” to convey the sense of the text. Bo says they are wrong, that it is merely there to “create a doctrine.”

    This is of general importance. In case anyone is reading, be careful about dropping italicized words. The sense of the verse the translators provide is generally right, especially when all translations agree. You had better really know your Greek to deviate from that. It may at times be useful to set aside italicised words to glimpse the impact / emphasis of the original, but if it changes the meaning, you’re on shaky ground, unless you really think you know the Greek better than all the translators and commentators. It can lead you into various errors.

    ****
    II Timothy 3:16-17.
    As Bo said, “context is everything.” He draws in verse 15 to refer to the Scriptures Timothy knew as a child, and so claims that the only Scriptures in view are Old Testament Scriptures. Thus, the Scriptures which Timothy was to preach (4:2) are the Old Testament Scriptures. This is grievous error because it removes the New Testament from the great statement of verses 16-17, and it undermines Biblical canonicity.

    But context is everything. The Greek term for “holy Scriptures” in verse 15 is different from the term in verse 16. It occurs only once in the New Testament, but was in common usage among the Jews to refer to the Old Testament. So Bo is right that Paul referred to the OT in v. 15.

    But then, in verse 16, he explicitly expands it to “all Scripture.” He used contrasting terms so the broader scope of verse 16 (and 4:2) would be obvious. All Scripture, including the NT, is the Word Timothy was to preach..

    Timothy did have New Testament Scriptures, probably most of them. Bo does not like “probably” or “certainly,” but he is mistaken. Timothy had I Timothy. He was pastoring in Ephesus (I Tim. 1:3), so he “certainly” had Ephesians, unless the church at Ephesus decided not to keep his letter to them, which is ludicrous. Colosse was on the great road east from Ephesus, and the Colossians were told to circulate their letter, so he probably had Colossians.

    He certainly knew of, and probably had Luke, for in I Timothy 5:18 Paul quoted Luke 10:7 and cited it as “Scripture.” That tells us Paul had a copy, and knew that Timothy would know of what he was talking. So Luke was known to Timothy when Paul wrote I Timothy, which means he would have wanted a copy if he didn’t have one. Being in a centre like Ephesus, he probably could have acquired one. If he had Luke, it is probable he also had Acts.

    Luke mentions previously written Gospel accounts. So Matthew and Mark were well-known when Luke wrote. By the time Paul wrote I Timothy, Luke was known as Scripture, so Matthew and Mark would have been even better known. That is when I Timothy, not II Timothy, was written. Ephesus was a major centre, and a major church, It is barely credible to suggest they would not have had these Scriptures by the time II Timothy was written.

    II Peter 3 tells us Paul’s writings were accepted as Scripture, even before Paul’s death. Thus, they would have been widely distributed — and again, Ephesus was a major centre.

    Bo’s idea here is dangerous because it undermines Biblical canonicity. The New Testament Scriptures were accepted and widely distributed during New Testament times. The New Testament canon did not come into existence at a church council hundreds of years later. Bo is playing into the hands of Roman Catholicism here, whether he knows it or not. I discussed canonicity here: http://mindrenewers.com/2012/03/05/the-canon-of-scripture/.

    ****
    These two errors go far beyond the scapegoat controversy. They are relevant to the scapegoat controversy, but have importance far beyond that. I could address more here, but it is hard to see how it is profitable at this point.

  90. Jon,

    It would be good for you to concede that your view of the Azazel goat is wrong or at least questionable. Other Christian scholars have at least done that. Your final analysis was shown to be at least a bit off. I would at least like to see a concession that my view has merit since I was able to easily refute much of what you posted.

    To more important matters:

    I accept the whole of the Protestant Bible as scripture. All inspired, both the older and newer scriptures.

    For the record…every other time the Greek word for scripture in 2 Timothy 3:16 is used in the “New Testament” it is completely obvious that the author is referring to the “Old Testament” except for in 2 Peter 3:16. Even here it is likely referring to the “Old Testament,” though it could be referring to other apostolic writings. The context in 2 Peter being that people that are unlearned (in the scripture) twist what Paul says to mean that it is permissible to disregard YHWH’s law.

    2 Peter 3
    16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the IGNORANT and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.
    17 You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of LAWLESS PEOPLE and lose your own stability.

    In 2 Timothy 3:16 Paul is using the word in reference to the previous verse where he speaks of holy scripture, which was the “Old Testament” that Timothy knew as a boy. Paul never uses this word elsewhere except in reference to the “Old Testament.”

    Even if Paul is referring to more than the “Old Testament” in this solitary place, he is still expecting ALL scripture, not just the NT, to be used in our doctrine, instruction in righteous living, and good works. I have produced NT scripture after scripture that supports the idea that Messiah and the apostles taught that we are to continue to keep YHWH’s commandments. We are to live by every word that has come from His mouth. The one obvious thing is that the 10 commandments were spoken audibly from YHWH’s mouth. Sabbath keeping is one of them. You do not think that we are commanded to keep the 7th day holy. Have you not twisted the scripture to produce lawless actions like Peter said would happen?

    Mt 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by EVERY word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

    Mt 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

    It is provable that the two greatest commandments are love for YHWH and our neighbor. It is also provable that all the others are the details to actually performing the two greatest. The 10 are not the least of the commandments. Number 4 is not less than the rest. If Paul or any other apostle taught against keeping every last little commandment, they have forfeited being called great in the kingdom of heaven. If Messiah taught any apostle to not keep every commandment, He is not Messiah. If the NT teaches us that we can disregard YHWH’s law, it is not scripture, as it must not contradict the previous scripture. If we think that the NT teaches us to disobey the OT scripture, we are twisting the scriptures just like Peter said would happen.

    I am not SDA. Any group that has a special teacher such that all other ideas must bow to their teaching or interpretation is off base. If we have a special teacher, it must only be Messiah. If we make all other ideas or scriptures bow to Paul, we are in just as much error as other false systems. The pedestal does not belong to E.G. White or Paul or Peter or even Moses. Let YHWH be true and every man a liar…even Paul if we think that he contradicted Moses and Messiah.

    I do not think that Paul wrote anything contrary to the 10 commandments or any other commandment that we find in the OT. If your doctrine sees Paul breaking and teaching men to break even the smallest of the OT commandments, you make him out to be least in the kingdom at best and a false teacher at worst. Twisting the scriptures, especially Paul’s, was warned against. We do well to take heed.

    When someone, even a Greek scholar, can insert a very small italicized word like “is” into a phrase that everywhere else only means and is translated “the body of Messiah,” and by so doing make Paul contradict the previous scripture, we need to take heed. Maybe they are translating according to their doctrine instead of according to the truth. If every translator is wrong because they have been taught by the previous translator who was taught by the previous translator in an over arching system that twists what Paul wrote to contradict the law and the 10 commandments (testimony), what are we a part of?

    Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

    As for the real Paul, he proved where he stood.

    Ac 21:24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.

    Shalom

  91. Bo, the scapegoat bears sins. Satan does not bear our sins. Ellen White’s view is blasphemy. If you think it symbolises Satan, but bearing sins is not part of that symbolism, perhaps your view is only confused and contradictory, not heretical. I won’t debate it further. Barnes seems to think the goat goes to Satan, but that is not saying it symbolises Satan.
    ***

    Paul refers to the NT as “graphe” (“Scripture”) in II Timothy 3:16 and I Timothy 5:18. Peter includes apostolic writings in “graphe.” The Greek for “other” is loipoi, “remaining” or “rest of” — they twist Paul’s writings as they do the rest of the Scriptures. II Peter 3:2 groups apostolic teaching and prophetic teaching, so Peter refers to all Scriptures, Old and New, in II Peter 3.

    You are obviously correct that Timothy was to teach Old as well as New. “The Law is good, if a man use it lawfully,” Paul had told Timothy. Timothy knew the lawful use. He was with Paul when Paul wrote Romans — and Colossians..
    ***

    You said, “The observances that Paul lists are a shadow of things to come and they are a shadow of the body of Messiah.” “Body” is nominative. Your idea would require “soma” to be in the genitive. Nominative case denotes the subject of a sentence. If no verb is present, one (“is”) must be supplied. You are murdering this verse. Don’t take my word for it. Ask any first year Greek student. If you want to charge all translators with error, at least learn some Greek so you can make sure you aren’t flying in the face of basic Greek grammar.

    Christ is our Passover, our Firstfruits, our Trumpets, our Sabbath. They are shadows, He is the substance, the reality which casts the shadow. That is what the verse says. You’ll need to re-boot on this verse, and adjust your doctrine accordingly. No one who knows any Greek at all will accept your view of this verse. No one.

  92. Jon,

    Maybe a 1st year Greek student knows what you spoke of, but more accomplished Greek scholars have things like this to say:

    “In an article published in the Journal of Biblical Literature, the Greek scholar Troy Martin correctly points out the following about Colossians 2:16-17.

    —– article quotes begin —–

    “The short clause το δε σωμα του χριστου at the end of Col 2:17 is misunderstood by an exegetical tradition that ignores the grammatical structure of the clause… The completely negative assessment of the shadow conception among some commentators is not present in this text.”

    “When the clause το σωμα του χριστου is [mis]understood as a nominal clause with an ellipsed εστίν, then it becomes an independent clause. Syntactically, a coordinating conjunction cannot link this independent clause with the subordinate relative clause α εστιν σκια των μελλοντων.” After an analysis of various popular explanations, Martin concludes, “…the only remaining grammatical option is to connect το δε σωμα του χριστου with the independent clause μη ουν τις υμας κρινετω at the beginning of the sentence.”

    “The construction μη ουν τις υμας κρινετω… το δε σωμα του χριστου is an antithesis. The negative member is stated first; the contrasting positive member introduced by an adversative conjunction occurs second… A common ellipsis in antitheses occurs when the verb of the first member is not repeated in the second member. A clear example is 1 Cor 10:24… This example from Corinthians indicates that perhaps the verb κρινετω is ellipsed in the second member of the antithesis in Colossians. When this ellipsed verb is supplied, the antithesis in Col 2:16-17 reads, μη ουν τις υμας κρινετω… το δε σωμα του χριστου [κρινετω]…”

    Martin’s “…investigation of the clause το δε σωμα του χριστου in Col 2:17 suggests that the practices mentioned in 2:16 are those of the Colossian Christians and not the opponents… early Christians observe both feasts and sabbaths.”

    —– article quotes end —–

    If none of that makes sense to you, the Greek text “μη ουν τις υμας κρινετω… το δε σωμα του χριστου” was fairly literally translated by the KJV as, “Let no man therefore judge you… but the body… of Christ.” The italicized word “is” in the KJV and most modern translations is not explicitly written in the Greek text, and supplying it yields some inconsistencies with the overall Greek grammatical structure for these two verses which make up one long sentence. The word “reality” from your translation corresponds to σωμα which literally means “body” and is also translated as “body” repeatedly throughout the rest of the epistle to the Colossians.

    The “body of Christ” is earlier defined in Colossians as “the church” of whom Christ is the “Head” (Colossians 1:18, 1:24; compare Colossians 2:19). The surrounding context of Colossians 2:4, 2:8, 2:18, 2:23, etc. contains warnings against allowing ungodly influences that are not of Christ to deceive or cheat us. In contrast, the “body of Christ” that truly follows the lead and example of Christ as the “Head” is a good influence.

    The scholarly article cited above suggests that an understanding of the imperative verb κρινετω (“let ___ judge”) in Colossians 2:16 applies to the rest of the sentence, which includes the final clause in 2:17 (“but the body of Christ”). If the implicit understanding of an ellipsed κρινετω (“let ___ judge”) and possibly υμας (“you” plural) were added back into the closing clause, then we get a clearer understanding of, “Therefore, do not let [just] anyone judge you… but [let] the body of Christ [judge/correct/administer you].” This idea can still be implicitly understood without any ellipsed words or translator helper words added: “Therefore, do not let anyone judge you… but the body of Christ.” The rest of the verse describes the practices of the early New Testament church “which are a shadow of the coming things” (YLT). The way these practices were being observed by the first century church were not to be influenced by anyone outside of the body of Christ (the true Spirit-led believers in the church). The idea of corrections within the church was not a foreign concept to Paul or Jesus Christ as 1Corinthians 5:12 – 6:6, Galatians 2:11-16, Matthew 18:15-17, etc. make plain; neither were administrative decisions (Acts 15:19-20).

    Shalom

  93. Hello, Bo. Interesting article. A few thoughts.

    1. The translation which he suggests is grammatically possible (unlike the one you suggested, which is simply impossible).
    2. He rightly sees de as antithetical. This is almost always the case. You weakened your argument previously by insisting it wasn’t.
    3. He acknowledges that virtually all the commentaries and translations differ from the translation he presents. It’s him against the world.
    4. Although word order in Greek is certainly not determinative, his translation is awkward given the word order, and you would generally need a compelling case to take his translation given that.
    5. His compelling case is based upon this: “Syntactically, a coordinating conjunction cannot link this independent clause with the subordinate relative clause α εστιν σκια των μελλοντων.” I would have to research this, but I don’t believe this rule is as hard and fast as he is making it. But the whole thing rests on the view that this is a coordinating conjunction, rather than the well-attested usage of de as a continuative / explanatory usage. In other words, his compelling case isn’t so compelling.

    His translation could work with the grammar. He obviously knows what he is talking about. I’m dubious about putting too much weight on the work of a man who has been a Roman Catholic professor of religion for 20 years. But he is right on the Greek to the extent that the grammar could be translated that way. It’s awkward. It doesn’t fit the context, notably v. 14. It doesn’t fit with the flow of the later part of the chapter. There are sound reasons why the commentators and the translators speak with one voice on this verse. But at least it is better than what you said previously. If you are determined to reject what the verse clearly says, this is a better argument for you.

    It is entirely different from any other reference to “the body of Christ.” Almost exclusively, those references are to the unity of the body of Christ. We don’t see, when the church is to judge a matter, references to the body of Christ. The point of the term is our unity. So it is contrary to the way the phrase “body of Christ” is always used, in addition to the problems within this particular context..

  94. Jon,

    I think that you assume that verse 14 declares the Law of YHWH cancelled/blotted out. It is not the law that was done away with, but the record of our transgressions of it…our arrest warrant…our bill of debt. Messiah bore our sins on the cross and forgave us of all our sin. He did not come to void the law. Read it for yourself.

    Colossians 2
    14 by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. (ESV)

    14 the slate wiped clean, that old arrest warrant canceled and nailed to Christ’s Cross. (Message)

    14 having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. (NIV)

    14 God wiped out the charges that were against us for disobeying the Law of Moses. He took them away and nailed them to the cross. (CEV)

    Matthew 5
    17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

    Romans 3
    31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

    The flow of the latter part of the chapter is in full agreement with the idea not to allow men to make up regulations as to how to perform YHWH’s commandments concerning eating and drinking, and His appointed times.

    Colossians 2
    18 LET NO ONE BEGUILE YOU of your prize, delighting in humble-mindedness and in WORSHIP OF THE MESSENGERS, intruding into the things he hath not seen, being vainly puffed up by the mind of his flesh,
    19 and not holding the HEAD FROM WHICH ALL THE BODY—through the joints and bands gathering supply, and being knit together—may increase with the increase of God.
    20 If, then, ye did die with the Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as living in the world, ARE YE SUBJECT TO ORDINANCES…
    22…AFTER THE COMMANDS AND TEACHINGS OF MEN? (YLT)

    WE are not to let men and their doctrines and commandments and traditions be our judges in matters of scripture. We should not bow to preachers/messengers instead of to YHWH’s direct commands. The latter part of the chapter does not say that YHWH’s commandments and ordinances are not to be submitted to, but that man’s commandments are not to be submitted to. Messiah stripped the Jewish religious leaders of their authority (Col.2:15) and imparted authority to His disciples.(Mat.28:18-20; Mat. 16:19; 1 Cor.6:2-5)

    The rest of the chapter is also about the body of Messiah as can be seen in verse 19 and 20. Even in the rest of Colossians, the body of Messiah is a consistent theme. (Col.1:18,24; 2:17,19; 3:15)

    Colossians 2
    16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
    17 (Which are a shadow of things to come) but the body of Christ.
    18 Let no man beguile you of your reward…

    Matthew 5
    19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

    Romans 8
    7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

    When we subject ourselves to YHWH’s law concerning even the small things, like the shadows, and teach men to do the same, we do not loose our reward. When we listen to men’s commandments and doctrines that say that the law has been voided or destroyed or nailed to the cross or made irrelevant or optional, we are beguiled out of our greatness in the kingdom of heaven. No keeping of the law saves us or makes us righteous in YHWH’s eyes. Only the blood of Messiah can do that by grace through faith, but our loyalty to Messiah and His kingdom is shown by our obedience. Our actions and commitment to YHWH’s word proves how much we can be trusted in ruling and reining with Him in the future kingdom. And in that future kingdom, YHWH’s Sabbaths and Holy days and new moons will be kept. (Isa.66:23; Zec.14:16-19; Eze.46:1-3; Eze.45:21-25)

    Shalom

  95. Bo, we’ll just go in circles here. You simply can’t say that verses like Matthew 5:19 mean that we are to follow all the commandments of the Law, unless you are going to say we are required to be circumcised, offer sacrifices, go to Jerusalem three times a year, etc. Men who have a blemish cannot be a priest (but all believers are priests). We have to wear fringes on our clothes. We should have cities of refuge. We should go every year to Mt. Ebal and Mt. Gerizim to proclaim the blessings and the curses. Keep the dietary restrictions. And on and on.

    Do you obey those things? All of them? Why not? You aren’t keeping the least of the commandments. Do you keep the feasts but not go to Jerusalem for them? Why not?

    I do appreciate your zeal, but zeal is not enough.

  96. I believe we here at DefCon have been fairly gracious in allowing this discussion to go on. However, I believe it high time it be drawn to a close. As Jon has said, it is going in circles. DefCon exists for the edification of the saints, and allowing someone to continue to insist we are still under the law serves only to bring confusion to the issue. Let’s wrap this up and bring it to an end.

  97. Chris,

    Thank you for your graciousness. Hopefully the readers have been edified by examining themselves in regard to walking in the truth. For the record, I have never said, nor do I believe that we are under the law. I believe that when we walk in the Spirit we fulfill the law and when we walk in the flesh we cannot keep the law. Grace and faith do not make the law void, grace empowers us to keep YHWH’s commandments.

    Ro 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit…
    6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
    7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

    Ro 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

    1Jo 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

    Ro 6:15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

    Thanks again. I will understand if you decide not to post this comment, but I would prefer that you did as it states my belief about being under the law.

    Shalom

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: