In the MHP Jesus is blotting out the memory and record of specific sins, as such, it wasn't available to people before 1844. Anticipating it in advance did not make it happen. No one living can benefit from Jesus' ministry in the MHP until it includes the living.

Repentance does not happen in the MHP, instead, it happens in the OC. Living without sin happens in the HP. Since sanctification is still available to us today it is obvious Jesus' ministry in the MHP includes aspects of the OC and HP ministries.

The reason Jesus can accomplish it all from the MHP is due to the fact His specific MHP duties involve, at this point, only the dead in Christ. The living are presently preoccupied with aspects associated with the OC and the HP. Not until the IJ includes the living will the ministry unique to the MHP involve them personally.

It might as well have been called the Great Mistake here in these parts because this is the sentiment of the people and leaders. They don't realize the critical element they are dismissing as mistaken fanaticism. This is not a good thing to teach young people about our faith. It will only lead to more problems in theology down the road. The Lord will harvest a million more Fords in the end if this is not corrected by leadership. But I fear they will continue on in their rebellion.

Dennis

Dennis, if the College Place that you live in is in Walla Walla, then I understand better your concern with departing from Adventist doctrine. None of us can save the ship of Adventism. That is up to God to do. We can and should speak up when we have an opportunity, but if we remember that Christ is at the helm, our tone will be confident rather than strident.

This thread apparently is one that you don't want to address directly. I hope you'll change your mind. I have a few more ideas to post on the teachings of the pioneers.

MM, there is some agreement between your position and the position of the pioneers on one point – the blotting out of sin. JN Loughborough for example remarked that he often used the expression “ ‘It is not common to blot out accounts until they are settled:’ so our sins are not blotted out until the time of refreshing comes, which is when Jesus leaves the sanctuary and lays the blotted-out sins on the head of the scape-goat.” Page 86 of Vol 5., The Doctrine of the Sanctuary.

James White took a different position but I believe both Loughborough and White are correct and I’ll reconcile them below, but first, White’s position: White does not equate the blotting out of sin with their being placed on the scape-goat at the end of the Holiest service. Instead, he equates it with the application of the blood during the service. Whereas Loughborough says that the blotting out is the last act of laying the sin on the head of the scape-goat, White argues that the application of the blood by the High Priest to the articles of the sanctuary effects the erasure of sin. White says that Christ is at the right hand of God “ready to plead the cause of every repenting sinner, and through Him sinners may find pardon. He also offers His blood in the Most Holy for the blotting out of the sins of the Just of every age.”

White is correct regarding the overall purpose of Christ’s ministry in the Holiest – to plead his blood for the forgiveness of our sins before the mercy seat so that they may go beforehand to judgement. White interprets I Timothy 5:24, “Some men’s sins are open beforehand, going before to judgment, and some they follow after” to mean that sins confessed and forsaken go to the Holiest where Christ’s ministry of His own blood blots them out.

So Loughborough is in error on the issue of sin not being blotted out until it is placed on the head of the scapegoat. Why? Because God promises to remember our confessed sins no more today. The important aspect of blotting out is not whether we remember our sin, but whether God does. The assurance that God has forgiven our sin today and buried them in the depths of the sea brings with it the full blessing of the presence of the Holy Spirit to the individual. As Ellen White has said, the latter rain is available to individuals now.

But Loughborough correctly connects the corporate promise of the latter rain with the corporate blotting out of sin. That occurs when the church is tested with the ultimate choice. Those who meet the test receive the latter rain which according to the types is at the Feast of Harvest or Tabernacles shortly after the Day of Atonement. As I’ve noted before, Christ confirmed this interpretation by promising the latter rain during that Feast and pointing to the types of that Feast as symbolic of the corporate outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

Mark, yes, we did not agree awhile back and it looks as though it remains true now. I believe Sister White makes it clear that Jesus' ministry in the MHP involves the cases of the dead. The record and memory of specific sins are blotted out when Jesus retains a name in the Book of Life forever. This is the sole purpose of Jesus' ministry in the MHP.

Eventually, during the MOB crisis, the IJ will include the cases of the living. Their specific sins will be blotted out while they are alive. They will be unable to recall them. In the meantime, our experience involves the OC and the HP. Sister White clearly places the IJ of the living in the future. It did not begin with the living in 1844 or any other previous time.

GC 490
Solemn are the scenes connected with the closing work of the atonement. Momentous are the interests involved therein. The judgment is now passing in the sanctuary above. For many years this work has been in progress. Soon--none know how soon--it will pass to the cases of the living. In the awful presence of God our lives are to come up in review. At this time above all others it behooves every soul to heed the Saviour's admonition: "Watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is." Mark 13:33. "If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee." Revelation 3:3. {GC 490.1}

3SG 134, 135
Those who have delayed a preparation for the day of God cannot obtain it in the time of trouble, or at any future period. The righteous will not cease their earnest agonizing cries for deliverance. They cannot bring to mind any particular sins, but in their whole life they can see but little good. Their sins had gone beforehand to judgment, and pardon had been written. Their sins had been borne away into the land of forgetfulness, and they could not bring them to remembrance. Certain destruction threatens them, and like Jacob they will not suffer their faith to grow weak, because their prayers are not immediately answered. Though suffering the pangs of hunger, they will not cease their intercessions. They lay hold of the strength of God as Jacob laid hold of the angel, and the language of their soul is, "I will not let thee go except thou bless me." The saints at length prevail like Jacob, and are gloriously delivered by the voice of God. {3SG 134.2}

Be ye as "watchmen" for the hour is at hand!

Yes BB, the third angel's job is to act as the watchman because the judgment is in progress in the Holiest. This is Good news for the saints.

I learned more about Abion Fox Ballinger today and his position has strong similarities to yours MM. The man had a fertile mind. He built a radically different view of the sanctuary, and the thing that impressed me favorably was that he based all his ideas on scripture. His interpretation were not as sound as he thought though. For example, like you, he retained the significance of 1844, but rather than seeing the work of Christ as involving the cleansing, sealing and sanctification of the church which corresponds to His work in heaven, he felt that the cleansing only involved the blotting out of sin - a judicial act only. He seems to be closer to the truth than you though on the link between the intercession of Christ in the Holiest and sanctification. His view continued to link the Holiest ministry of Christ with Sanctification but he had it commence in 31 AD. To support that view, he relied on Hebrews and also quoted Mrs. White's statement in the DA regarding Christ making an atonement at that time.

Ballenger is by far the closest to your thinking of any theologian I've encountered so far.

But he also made a few challenges to the doctrine that I hope to touch on later. The most substantial one was his position that the blood of all the sacrifices, including the daily ones, atone for sin but do not defile. He argued that the sin of the people itself defiled the sanctuary whether they confessed it or not and in support of that position he quoted Lev. 20:3 here it says that a man who sacrifices his offspring to Molech defiles the sanctuary. In his view the sin defiled the sanctuary, the daily and yearly sacrifices provided atonement but did not defile the sanctuary, and the final blotting out occured at the very end of the ministry of Christ before His return. It is an arguement worth looking at.

Edited to correct the Lev scripture reference.

[ January 02, 2006, 10:55 AM: Message edited by: Mark Shipowick ]

Ballenger was correct that sin does not need to be confessed in order to defile the heavenly sanctuary. He interprets Lev. 20:3 correctly in my view; that is, God is saying that the sin of the man who offers his offspring to Molech defiles the sanctuary whether they are confessed or not.

This is in agreement with the overall structure and layout of the sanctuary. Revelation confirms that the sins of the gentiles desecrate and defile part of the heavenly sanctuary – the outer court - and the heavenly Jerusalem.

quote:

---

11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty [and] two months. Rev 11:2

---

In contrast to the defilement caused by the gentiles, the unconfessed sins of Israel defile the inner court and specifically the bronze altar. In scripture we have the picture that their sins are inscribed on the horns of the bronze altar. Ballenger quoted the following texts, and again, I agree:

quote:

---

17:1 The sin of Judah [is] written with a pen of iron, [and] with the point of a diamond: [it is] graven upon the table of their heart, and upon the horns of your altars; Jer. 17:1

21:14 But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to slay him with guile; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die. Lev. 21:14.

---

Where he is mistaken is in discarding the idea that confession results in transferring the sin from the inner court/bronze altar to the sanctuary. His is completely right in saying that the confession does not contaminate – confession does not contaminate, but sin does - but wrong in insisting that there is no transfer of sin to the priesthood and sanctuary. The types support our interpretation on that point.