I'm not sure what you mean by "literal" here. If you mean "literal" in the sense of "literal blood," as in "actual blood," then, of course, the blood of Jesus here is not literal, since there is no actual blood, of any sort, in the heavenly sanctuary.

All blood referred to is symbolic in meaning. Everything regarding to the sanctuary is symbolic in meaning. This isn't to say that there aren't real things involved. There are real sins, which need to be forgiven, and atoned for. There is a real sanctuary, a real throne of God, where God really resides, and so forth. But the things which were written were written to teach us spiritual lessons, to illustrate spiritual truth.

Sin resides in our minds. The problem of sin is there. The plan of salvation is a means to cleans US from sin. We are the ones who need it!

As we ask questions regarding what certain texts mean, what we are really seeking to do is to understand the spiritual truth involved, so that we, by believing the gospel, can be cleansed of our sin (also a phrase, conveying spiritual truth, which needs to be understood, but this post is long enough).

I see the blood as simply the medium through which sin is transferred.



As the sinner confesses his sin, it transfers to the blood, then to the priest, then to the sanctuary.

What does this mean? Sin is an act, which takes place in time and space. It's not a physical substance, which can be transported by blood to a sanctuary, or anywhere else.

So, the blood cleanses the sinner of his sin, while the same blood defiles the sanctuary with the sin that it carries.

As you pointed out, the blood is a symbol. What is it symbolic of?

On the Day of Atonement, the blood removes the sin from the sanctuary and transfers it to Azazel. Again, it cleanses and defiles.

Which means?

Essentially, it is the sin that defiles. The presence of sin shows defilement, while its absence shows purity.

This makes sense. Here the symbology is being translated into something meaningful. Where the absence of sin really shows purity is in the sinner, is it not? And the same thing can be said in regards to defilement.

But the blood is the vessel that moves it around.

Meaning?

Let's make this a bit more personal. Does the blood of Christ cleanse us? Inherently, it does not. It can only cleanse when we allow Him to take our iniquities away.

[color:blue]By "inherently" I take it you mean literally? That is, the literal blood of Jesus does not cleanse us. Surely all can agree to that. We do not bathe in literal blood.

Ok, so what does it mean to say that we are cleansed when we allow Christ to take our iniquities away. Where does Christ take our iniquities from when He takes it away? We say from "us," which is surely correct, but more precisely, isn't it clear that it is from our minds that the sin is removed? That is, our thought patterns are changed so that we choose not to commit the given sin anymore.

Where does blood fit in? The blood represents the life of Jesus Christ. When we perceive the height and lenght and breadth and height of God's love, given for us in Christ, that vision of God's love and character motivates us to give ourselves to Him. We choose Christ over sin. The blood cleanses us from sin by changing our lives.[/quote]

But it is His spilled blood that gives Him the right to do that.

[color:blue]How so? Does not God have the right to pardon whom He chooses. Why would God need to spill His own blood to forgive someone?

When Lucifer sinned, we read in "The Great Controversy" that God offered again and again to pardon him, without their being any blood spilt.

Doesn't common sense tell us that the Creator has the right to pardon whom He will?



I think Fifield got it right.

MM: It is the death of the Lamb that atones for our sins. The blood is the medium by which our sins are transferred to the most holy place. In this sense the blood of Jesus is literal.

TE: I'm not sure what you mean by "literal" here. If you mean "literal" in the sense of "literal blood," as in "actual blood," then, of course, the blood of Jesus here is not literal, since there is no actual blood, of any sort, in the heavenly sanctuary.

MM: The blood in Jesus' body is real, too, right? Jesus became sin for us. He bears our sins in His body and blood in the most holy place. "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree." (1 Peter 2:24) This is literal, isn't it? Jesus did not cease bearing our sins in His body and blood when He rose from the grave and returned to heaven. That's how He transferred them from us to the heavenly sanctuary.

TE: Sin resides in our minds. The problem of sin is there. The plan of salvation is a means to cleans US from sin. We are the ones who need it!

MM: Our sins also reside within Jesus. Our sins are also recorded in the books in heaven. In this way, by these means, our sins have a physical existence and location outside of us. Jesus will blot the memory and record of specific sins from our minds and books. He will physically place them on Satan in the lake of fire. They will literally cease to exist when he dies.

TE: As we ask questions regarding what certain texts mean, what we are really seeking to do is to understand the spiritual truth involved, so that we, by believing the gospel, can be cleansed of our sin (also a phrase, conveying spiritual truth, which needs to be understood, but this post is long enough).

MM: Yes, of course, there are spiritual aspects of the truth. There are also literal, physical aspects. Just exactly how Jesus became sin for us is a mystery. Just exactly how He bears our sins and second death in His body and blood is also a mystery. But that's precisely what He is doing for us right now in the most holy place. It is all very literal and very awesome.

Again, to address the title of this thread:

Jesus' blood is not defiled by the sins it bears, nor does His blood cleanse the sins it bears. His blood is merely the means by which He bears our sins in His body in the most holy place until the day He places them on Satan in the lake of fire where our sins will cease to exist.

The Great Controversy, page 421 (a single paragraph that has been separated and numbered)

1. As anciently the sins of the people were by faith placed upon the sin offering and through its blood transferred, in figure, to the earthly sanctuary, so in the new covenant the sins of the repentant are by faith placed upon Christ and transferred, in fact, to the heavenly sanctuary.

2. And as the typical cleansing of the earthly was accomplished by the removal of the sins by which it had been polluted, so the actual cleansing of the heavenly is to be accomplished by the removal, or blotting out, of the sins which are there recorded.

3. But before this can be accomplished, there must be an examination of the books of record to determine who, through repentance of sin and faith in Christ, are entitled to the benefits of His atonement.

4. The cleansing of the sanctuary therefore involves a work of investigation--a work of judgment. This work must be performed prior to the coming of Christ to redeem His people; for when He comes, His reward is with Him to give to every man according to his works. Revelation 22:12.

MM: It is the death of the Lamb that atones for our sins. The blood is the medium by which our sins are transferred to the most holy place. In this sense the blood of Jesus is literal.

TE: I'm not sure what you mean by "literal" here. If you mean "literal" in the sense of "literal blood," as in "actual blood," then, of course, the blood of Jesus here is not literal, since there is no actual blood, of any sort, in the heavenly sanctuary.

MM: The blood in Jesus' body is real, too, right?

Yes, the blood in Jesus' blood is real. Are you thinking Jesus pokes Himself with a needle, and dispenses blood over the alter to make atonement for us? What's the point here?

Jesus became sin for us.

Which means what?

He bears our sins in His body and blood in the most holy place. "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree." (1 Peter 2:24) This is literal, isn't it?

What do you mean "literal"? By the way, the verse you cited states that Christ bore our sins on the tree, not that He bears them in the MHP. (I'm not disagreeing with your point, that He bears our sins now in the MHP, just pointing out that the verse you cited doesn't say that).

Sin is an act we perform, which takes place in a certain time and place. Say I wilfully tell a lie for personal gain, as an example. Jesus does not literally bear that lie, right? Because that would be an impossibility. A lie is not a "thing" which can be placed from one place to another. You cannot say to me, "Tom, give me that lie. I'll keep it for you on my shelf. When you need it, I'll give it back." It's not like a pillow, or something like that.

These phrases which we repeat mean something. We should meditate upon what the meaning of the phrases we use are. There's great value in that. It's amazing how profound these simple words are (e.g. Christ bears our sins; the blood of Jesus cleanses us from our sin), but their meaning must be understood spiritually, not physically. (e.g. we do not take a physical bath in Jesus' blood, as if it were water, to cleans us from sin).

Jesus did not cease bearing our sins in His body and blood when He rose from the grave and returned to heaven. That's how He transferred them from us to the heavenly sanctuary.

I agree with this.

TE: Sin resides in our minds. The problem of sin is there. The plan of salvation is a means to cleans US from sin. We are the ones who need it!

MM: Our sins also reside within Jesus.

Meaning what?

Our sins are also recorded in the books in heaven. In this way, by these means, our sins have a physical existence and location outside of us.

The recording of a thing does not give a physical existence to the thing. For example, if you buy a house, that transaction is recorded. That recorded transaction does not constitute a house. If you go to the county courthouse, you will not see your house there. The house does not have a physical existence outside of your property.

Jesus will blot the memory and record of specific sins from our minds and books.

This is getting to the spiritual meaning involved in the words, although this should not be understood as an arbitrary act on Christ's part, but rather as the development of our character as we mature through faith in Him. In other words, He doesn't perform a labotomy on us to alter our brains to make us forget things. But we are completely healed from our sin, and "the former things are passed away." Not like Alzeimer's disease, but like a fully healed addict.

He will physically place them on Satan in the lake of fire.

Sins are not physical things. They cannot be physically transferred, because they aren't physical.

They will literally cease to exist when he dies.

Sin resides in the mind. When no one is alive who chooses to sin, then sin will cease to exist, and for that reason.

TE: As we ask questions regarding what certain texts mean, what we are really seeking to do is to understand the spiritual truth involved, so that we, by believing the gospel, can be cleansed of our sin (also a phrase, conveying spiritual truth, which needs to be understood, but this post is long enough).

MM: Yes, of course, there are spiritual aspects of the truth. There are also literal, physical aspects.

The spiritual aspects are real. They can also, rightfully, be called "literal." However, they are not physical, at least in the sense you are speaking of. That is, sin physically exists in the mind, and our minds (or, perhaps, "brains" would be a better choice of word) physically change, as our thinking changes, so there is a physical aspect to our salvation. However, there is no such thing as physical sins which get transferred from one location to another. This is symbolic language given to communicate spiritual truth. The spiritual truth communicated is sufficient. There is no need for an addition meaning to the spiritual truth communicated. Indeed, the spiritual truth communicated, once understood, obviates any necessary for some additional meaning. E.g. when we understand what "the blood of Jesus cleanses us from sin" means, we do not need to think in terms of physically applying Jesus' blood to ourselves in order to become clean, nor does it make sense to do so.

Just exactly how Jesus became sin for us is a mystery.

What do you mean by saying, "Jesus became sin for us"? Before stating it is a mystery, it would probably be good to define what's meant by the phrase.

Just exactly how He bears our sins and second death in His body and blood is also a mystery.

It would be good to define this as well. It sounds a bit like you're thinking in terms of something which doesn't make sense (e.g., like sin being a physical thing which has a physical existence) and, of course, that would be a mystery (not something which can be understood, since it doesn't make sense).

But that's precisely what He is doing for us right now in the most holy place. It is all very literal and very awesome.

I still don't know what you think these things mean. For example, you state that Christ bears our sin, which indeed He does. But what does that mean?

Again, to address the title of this thread:

Jesus' blood is not defiled by the sins it bears, nor does His blood cleanse the sins it bears.

Jesus' blood is bearing our sins?

His blood is merely the means by which He bears our sins in His body in the most holy place until the day He places them on Satan in the lake of fire where our sins will cease to exist.

You're suggesting that Jesus removes our sins from His blood, and then places them on Satan? Like with a syringe?

Here's a question to consider. Given that sin exists in us, because it resides in our mind, could we say that Jesus bears our sin, because they reside in His mind? (of course, how they reside would be completely different, since we have committed sin, and Christ has not.)

TE: Here's a question to consider. Given that sin exists in us, because it resides in our mind, could we say that Jesus bears our sin, because they reside in His mind?

MM: Of course Jesus is consciously aware of the fact He is bearing our sins in His body. But the Bible simply says He is bearing our sins in His body - not in His mind. Just exactly how He does it is a mystery.

Although sin is not a substance, it is the transgression of God's law. Sin is any thought, word, or deed that violates the word of God, the law of God, and the sinless example of the Son of God. In this sense sin assumes a physical form in the person of sinners.

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." In the same way faith is a substance, so to sin is a substance.

TE: Here's a question to consider. Given that sin exists in us, because it resides in our mind, could we say that Jesus bears our sin, because they reside in His mind?

MM: Of course Jesus is consciously aware of the fact He is bearing our sins in His body. But the Bible simply says He is bearing our sins in His body - not in His mind. Just exactly how He does it is a mystery.

The Bible says "My kidneys instruct me in the night seasons" (Ps. 16:7). I think it would be a good idea to ask, "What does the Bible mean when it says such and such" rather than just say "It's a mystery." For example, in reading Ps. 16:7, would you respond, "The Bible says our kidneys instruct us in the night season. Just how our kidneys do this is a mystery."

I really don't understand what hermaneutic you are using to try to understand Scripture. It seems you are not asking the most basic and important question, which is, "What does (whatever) mean?"

For example, when the Scriptures say that Christ bore our sins in His body, the question we should ask is "what does this mean?" You don't (as far as I can tell) attempt to answer this question, but merely comment, "This is what the Bible says. How He does this is a mystery."

The teachings in Scripture are not arbitrary. There is spiritual truth which needs to be discerned. Otherwise we're just dealing with hocus pocus.

Although sin is not a substance, it is the transgression of God's law. Sin is any thought, word, or deed that violates the word of God, the law of God, and the sinless example of the Son of God. In this sense sin assumes a physical form in the person of sinners.

In what sense is a thought, word or deed a physical form in a person? Leave aside the question of sin, for a moment. In what sense is *any* thought, word or deed a physical form in the person?

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." In the same way faith is a substance, so to sin is a substance.

The word translated "substance" is more commonly translated "confidence". It should be extremely obvious that Paul was not using the word translated "substance" in the sense you are suggesting. Once again, you would be well served by asking the question, "What does this mean?"

TE: For example, in reading Ps. 16:7, would you respond, "The Bible says our kidneys instruct us in the night season. Just how our kidneys do this is a mystery."

MM: The relationship between mind and body is indeed a mystery. Yes, we know a lot about it, but there is more about it that we do not know. We are "fearfully and wonderfully made". Here is a quick study on Psalm 16:7. From it I conclude the reins of the heart symbolize our conscience.


TE: In what sense is a thought, word or deed a physical form in a person? Leave aside the question of sin, for a moment. In what sense is *any* thought, word or deed a physical form in the person?

MM: It has to do with the relationship between mind and body, right? Thoughts, words, and deeds do not exist in a vacuum. They are the byproduct of mind and body. They are both physical and spiritual.

TE: The word translated "substance" is more commonly translated "confidence". It should be extremely obvious that Paul was not using the word translated "substance" in the sense you are suggesting. Once again, you would be well served by asking the question, "What does this mean?"

MM: Faith is the confidence of things hoped for? Confidence may be a fruit of faith, but what is the substance? I believe we are the substance of faith. “Faith is not reality.” Apart from the faithful, faith has no substance. It’s simply an idea. Our believing the promises of God is what gives them physical form on earth. “It is inexplainable and immeasurable, beyond all human expression.”


In a similar way, sin takes on physical form in the person of sinners. Otherwise, sin is just an idea. Sin also assumed physical form in Jesus. He became the substance of sin. In destroying sinners God destroys sin. When Jesus consumed our sin and second death on the cross, He became the lawful owner of sin and death. Yes, it has to do with the mind, but it also involves the body. Mind and body are inseparable. But ideas have no substance without the body.

Consider this. When a person dies, his spirit or character returns to God. It is preserved in heaven until the day God restores it to the resurrected person. Character is the essence of who we are, it is “a quality of the soul”. When God resurrects a person and places their character back in them they resume where they left off. There is something intrinsically physical about character. It's more than just an idea. Just exactly how God stores it in heaven is a mystery. So to, sin is stored in heaven, in Jesus, in the most holy place. It will cease having a physical form when Satan and sinners die in the lake of fire. Then sin will cease to exist as a substance, but it will exist as an idea.

Before responding, I'd like to say that I thought this was a particularly well written post (that is, yours, the one I'm responding to).

In a similar way, sin takes on physical form in the person of sinners. Otherwise, sin is just an idea.

This is along the lines of what I've been saying. That is, sin is not a literal thing which can be physically held or transmitted. You say that in order to be other than "just an idea," it must take on physical form in the presence of sinners. Now is sin takes shape in the form of persons, then it should be clear that the blood transmitting sin cannot be a thing which should be taken literally, since people are not transmitted by blood. This gets back to the question of investigating what is the spiritual truth which is being communicated by the symbols.

Sin also assumed physical form in Jesus. He became the substance of sin.

This is an interesting idea. Jesus became the substance of sin. I'm not sure what this means. This seems to beg the question, "What is the subtance of sin"?


In destroying sinners God destroys sin.

This isn't possible. If God could destroy sin by destroying sinners, there would be no need for the Great Controversy. He would have simply destroyed Satan, and that would have been the end of it. But destroying Satan would have made things worse, not better. It would not have been evident that sin results in destruction, and the followers of God would have mistakenly thought that God was arbitrarily taking action to end it, rather than it playing itself out. This is explained in the chapter "It Is Finished" from "The Desire of Ages" (amongst other places, but this is the clearest that I'm aware of).



Please note the following points:
a)The end does not come as a result of an arbitrary action of God.
b)Rather, the rejectors of God's mercy reap that which they have sown. (by way of comparison, take a look at the first chapter of "The Great Controversy" which discusses the destruction of Jerusalem, where the same principles are laid out).
c)Sinners are destroyed as a result of serparating themselves from God, and cutting themselves off from life. That is, their death is a voluntary choice initiated by themselves. This is also explained in "The Great Contoversy" 542 ("The destiny of the wicked is fixed by their own choice. Their exclusion from heaven is voluntary with themselves,and just and merciful on the part of God.")
d)At the beginning of the great controversy, the angels did not understand that death is "the inevitable result of sin." This did not become evident until the death of Christ.
e)Had Satan and his followers been left to reap the full result of their sin, it would not have been apparent that their perishing was the inevitable result of sin. Notice it doesn't say "the inevitable result of God's punishment of sin" but rather "the inevitable result of sin."
f)A doubt of God's goodness would have remained, allowing an evil seed to produce deadly fruit. What is the evil seed? A doubt as to God's goodness.

Summing up, the problem God faced was that He knew that sin results in death, but His followers didn't. If he allowed the inevitable to happen right away, God's actions would have been misinterpreted. Rather than being understood as God's simply permitting the inevitable to happen, it would have been perceived as an action which God was initiating. That would have been in harmony with Satan's accusations regarding God's character. Instead God must allow the truth regarding sin to be demonstrated first, before allowing sin to suffer its inevitable result. This is why things have taken so long to be resolved, and still we're not finished as the great controversy continues, and will continue, until the truth about God is known.

At any rate, God does not solve the sin problem by destroying sinners, but by destroying sin, a much more difficult problem. The former could be resolved by force in a moment. That later requires the wisdom, genious, and love of an all-knowing self-sacrificing God.


When Jesus consumed our sin and second death on the cross,

Sin isn't a thing which can be consumed. Sin is a "thought, word or deed," to use your words. Jesus did not "consume" our thoughts, words, or deeds on the cross. Rather, He provided a means by which we can be set free from the power of sin.

He became the lawful owner of sin and death.

This sentence needs to be fleshed out. First of all, what does it mean to "own" sin? Or to "own" death? Secondly, to suggest that Jesus became a "lawful owner" implies that before Jesus became such, either He would an anlawful owner of sin and death, or sin and death had no owner.

Yes, it has to do with the mind, but it also involves the body. Mind and body are inseparable.

Of course this is true, but this isn't relevant in regards to our discussion. To refresh our memories as to the context of the discussion, we are discussing the question as to what it means to say that Jesus' blood is the medium by which sin is transferred to the heavenly sanctuary. I have been asserting that sin is not a "thing" which can be transferred, either by blood or anything else. (One can speak of sin being transferred from mind to mind; that would make sense) As a response to my assertion, you have been attempting to argue that sin is a physical thing which can be transferred. Your argument has been that the substance of sin, the "physical thing" which can be transmitted, is the body of the sinner. But this is not an adequate argument, because the body of the sinner does not get transmitted by Jesus' blood, which I'm sure you will admit.


But ideas have no substance without the body.

Consider this. When a person dies, his spirit or character returns to God. It is preserved in heaven until the day God restores it to the resurrected person. Character is the essence of who we are, it is “a quality of the soul”. When God resurrects a person and places their character back in them they resume where they left off. There is something intrinsically physical about character. It's more than just an idea. Just exactly how God stores it in heaven is a mystery. So to, sin is stored in heaven, in Jesus, in the most holy place. It will cease having a physical form when Satan and sinners die in the lake of fire. Then sin will cease to exist as a substance, but it will exist as an idea.

I think the difficulty here is in conceiving of sin as a "thing," as something that can be divorced from the mind of the sinner. Your example of character just makes the point I'm making. Our characters exist in our mind, and are demonstrated by our actions. God knows our character, and is able to reproduce it by reconstituting our minds when we are resurrected.

We could say that our sins are "stored" in Jesus in the Most Holy Place because He knows them; that is, they are stored in His mind. That would make sense. The cleansing of the sanctuary then can be understood as involving the cleansing of our minds, the purifying of our conscience, from sin (which is, indeed, precisely the point Hebrews makes). The work of the atonement involves our taking on "the mind of Christ." That is, we learn to see things as He sees them; His way of thinking becomes ours. Ellen White talks about this eloquently in the following quote from "Christ's Object Lessons"

TE: At any rate, God does not solve the sin problem by destroying sinners, but by destroying sin, a much more difficult problem.

MM: Here's the quote I had in mind: "In all who submit to His power the Spirit of God will consume sin. But if men cling to sin, they become identified with it. Then the glory of God, which destroys sin, must destroy them." {DA 107.4} Sin, apart from sinners, is not a substance that can be destroyed. It can only be destroyed by destroying sinners.

TE: Your argument has been that the substance of sin, the "physical thing" which can be transmitted, is the body of the sinner. But this is not an adequate argument, because the body of the sinner does not get transmitted by Jesus' blood, which I'm sure you will admit.

MM: Actually, I meant to say that Jesus became sin for us, thus, He was equipped to transport our sin in His body and blood to heaven. "A body hast thou prepared me." (Heb 10:5) Neither the Father nor the Spirit are capable of bearing our sins in the most holy place because they do not have a human body. Sin can only reside in a created body. It cannot reside in the body of God.

TE: Summing up, the problem God faced was that He knew that sin results in death, but His followers didn't.

MM: We are not going to agree on this point. I believe God is the one who will execute sinners in the lake of fire, and you believe God will allow sin to do it.