Yesterday I wrote a post that was still not able to be heard by many. Some saw it as an attack against the Sanctuary. Others saw it as a defense of the use of 1844 in ministry.
I think what is interesting is the inability to even conceive of a Sanctuary message without calculation of 1844. Can we discuss the implications of the sanctuary message without speaking of 1844? Can we speak of what the lamb of God means today? That is sanctuary imagery. Can we speak of what it means for Christ to be a high priest without even dealing with the Sanctuary? Some kind of way we must contemporize this symbol, can you do it without referring to the Sanctuary message of the Bible?
I am beginning to come to the conclusion that it is not possible to even say Sanctuary message without mathmatical calculations popping into our minds. Whatever ones view of the calculation of 1844, we must recognize that this is not the sum total of the Sancutary message.
You can actually talk about the sanctuary in the context of what Christ is doing and what it means for us. You don't have to have a calculator...that just tells us when it started to happen. The important thing is that it IS happening and the end is near.
ReplyDeleteThe real problem when talking about the sanctuary is how we try and interpret the shadow of the earthly sanctuary service into the reality of Christ and His incarnation. Trying to figure out all the meanings in the old ceremonial system when as Hebrews says we have the reality of Jesus Christ does not make a lot of sense.
ReplyDeleteAll Christians work from the perspective of Jesus when looking at the sanctuary system. So in much of it we see Christ yet in areas where there is no New Testament indications people tend to place their own conceptions. This has led Adventists to think that the blood taken into the holy place represents forgiven sins. There is no basis for such in either the old or the New Testament yet we use it for the cleansing of the sanctuary which interestingly enough was cleansed again on the day of Atonement with blood. But our own particular view on the subject has so changed our perspective that everything afterward is based upon our very questionable interpretation.
So if you want to talk about the Sanctuary do so with an eye to the real meaning, the reality of God incarnate in Christ.
Ken and Ron,
ReplyDeleteWhen I asked the question \"Is it possible to talk about the sanctuary service adn not talk about 1844?\" There are a few ways to look at it. 1. Is it possible for a preacher to preach about the sanctuary without refernce to calculating 1844? The answer to that question in my estimation is yes. But the more interesting question to me and I should have been clearer in my post is number 2. Is it possible for a preacher to preach about the sanctuary without making refernce to calculating 1844 without the people hearing a traditional calculation of 1844 or the people filling in the blanks and placing the calculation 1844 into your message?
This is an interesting question in light of the field of homiletics beginning to look at how and what people hear in messages. In fact it might be an interesting DMin or PhD dissertation. One could see if or how one\'s theology affects the hearing of messages on topics that are common to that community.
Well said Ron.
ReplyDeleteA comprehensive list of studies on the sanctuary message http://sabbathsermons.com/category/the-sanctuary-series/
ReplyDelete