phoneman-777

Without reading anything yet, I'm fully confident Scripture will overthrow every single point from top to bottom: Jesus can't be a Minister of the Sanctuary if he's sitting down - there was no chair for the high priest in the sanctuary. So, how do these two texts harmonize? "Sit" refers to "hold a position of authority" as in "sitting president". Two veils: the first at the entrance of the Holy and the second at the entrance of the Most Holy. He entered the first veil. Again: He can't be a Minister of the Sanctuary if He's sitting on a throne - no chairs for the high priest in the Sanctuary. Refers to His authority as being one with the Father. Nothing here says He entered into the "Most Holy Place" at the writing of Paul's letter to the Hebrews. Again, He can't be a High Priest if He's sitting down - there were no chairs for the high priest in the Sanctuary. Refers to His authority as being one with the Father. These verses disprove the catholic mass, not the Investigative Judgment. Outrage? Only to those who, being devoid of Christ, refuse to believe we can do "all things through Christ". Therefore, obedience is the outward evidence of the inward dwelling Christ (1 John 2:3-4 KJV) and disobedience proves otherwise. The Investigative Judgment vindicates the justice of God in saving believers because their discovered obedience - made possible only by the indwelling power of Christ (Phillipians 4:13 KJV) - is the outward evidence that the Savior resides in the heart (1 John 2:3-4 KJV). God's justice is vindicated by what is MADE POSSIBLE by the Cross: the obedience of the redeemed. What say you, friend?

Hi, Stan, the most famous detective to never be was Sherlock Holmes, who famously said, "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data". Our knowledge of Jesus' mission must be understood in the light of the O.T. sanctuary service, of which almost the entire Christian church is woefully ignorant, and therefore ill equipped to comment on eschatological issues which are STEEPED in sanctuary language and symbolism in the prophetic passages. As you know, when the guilty Israelite "leaned on the lamb" and "confessed" his sin and "shed it's blood", the penalty of sin for which he deserved death was passed onto innocent victim, and that man was as clean as the wind driven show - THE WORK OF FORGIVENESS WAS FINISHED. However, there yet remained much to do by the high priest by way of daily prayer, daily intercession, all daily duties, as well as the yearly "cleansing of the sanctuary" which included an Investigative Judgment" at the close of the ritual year. . Is not Jesus our "High Priest, a Minister of the Sanctuary of the True Tabernacle, which the Lord pitched and not man"? Absolutely. So, it's wildly inaccurate to claim Christ's entrance into the Most Holy Place for the final phase of His heavenly ministry - the Investigative Judgment - is "a denial of the finality of the Cross", ESPECIALLY WHEN BOTH THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA, VOL. II AND THE TALMUD BOTH PLAINLY STATE THAT THE DAY OF ATONEMENT IS THE DAY OF JUDGMENT.

We must consider that "reinstatement" implies prior suspension, of which none of the Ten Commandments were: "The works of His hands are verity and judgment. All His commandments (only the big Ten are Biblically associated with "His hands") are sure; they stand fast forever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness". - Psalms 111:7-8 KJV Never gonna be right to break any of the Ten, including the Sabbath (see below). In Hebrews 4:1-11 KJV, the word "rest" appears over and over in the context of "spiritual rest" and in every case the Greek word is "katapuasis" or it's root "katapuau" *** EXCEPT *** in verse 9 where the Greek is "Sabbatismos" - which refers to the weekly Sabbath. That's why Lamsa's Peshitta accurately renders it: [9] It is therefore the duty of the people of God to keep the Sabbath". [10] For he that hath entered into His rest, he hath ceased from his own works, as God did from His." In other words, it's our duty to keep the Sabbath because if we've entered into the spiritual rest of Jesus, we are to demonstrate that inward rest by resting outwardly from our work "as God did from His". It doesn't mean "rest from works of sin" as the false pulpit prophets claim, because God never rested from such. It doesn't mean "rest from the law" because by faith we establish the law, and by keeping the law we show our faith. When it comes to Hebrews 4:9 KJV, remember the English ain't what's inspired - the Greek is inspired. What say you, my friend?

I don't claim to be infallible. Please find me an excerpt from anything stamped with the RCC Imprimatur which says salvation is by grace through faith alone in the blood of Jesus. Not a link...the quotation. Copy and paste the quotation so that everyone can see and I will retract my statement.

The RCC rejects the idea that Jesus' blood is indispensable for salvation. They teach that God was so pleased by Jesus' perfect obedience that He decided to extend the gift of salvation to man, deposit it into the RCC for administration, and abide by their decision to either pardon or not pardon sinners - you heard that correctly. "The sentence of the priest precedes, and God subscribes to it". - Dignities and Duties of the Priest, Liguori They claim to occupy the Bema Seat. The unpardoned go to hell. The pardoned must still pay for their sins - hence Purgatory. Indulgences are the means by which the pardoned can purchase "time off" from Purgatory - the very point upon which the entire Protestant Reformation was launched. It's part of the reason why the Reformers correctly identified the papacy as the Antichrist of Bible prophecy from Scripture.

One thing that stands out to me about the Bema seat is that it belongs to Christ alone. But, I hear a lot of people say in Christian forums "If you knew Christ" or "You need Christ" or "You aren't saved" and they don't realize they are actually "taking the place of Christ" on His judgment seat...and "take the place of Christ" is the very definition of "AntiChrist". VineAbider, yours is an example of Christlike humility that is rare in these forums, and is commendable...just be careful. Did you hear about the guy who was given a medal for "the Most Humble Man in Town"? He put it around his neck and walked down the street, so they took it away

Actually, the idea of Purgatory is what resulted from the catholic church's rejection of "salvation by blood atonement". They teach Jesus' blood was shed only to appease the Father, not to greenlight forgiveness...that God was so pleased by the obedient life of Jesus that He decided to grant salvation to man through the discretion of the catholic priesthood "either not to pardon or to pardon, according as they refuse or give absolution...the sentence of the priest precedes, and God subscribes to it". And, though forgiven, the recipient of that forgiveness must still make atonement for his sins via the sufferings of Purgatory. Time in Purgatory may be lessened through the sale of "indulgences" where a bottomless barrel of "merit" filled by the good works of the saints (Mary's good works being MORE EFFICACIOUS than those of Christ) allows their merit to be credited to the forgiven person's account via a purchased "indulgence" by money, works, or whatever the priests specify. Isn't it funny how these blasphemous insults to God barely cause an eyeroll, but if anyone agrees with the Protestant Reformers who identified the papacy as "Antichrist" - everyone loses their minds?

What about the "many" saints in Matthew 24:12 who are going to be spat out of Jesus' mouth along with the merely lukewarm Laodiceans? They were absolutely saved, but wind up as lost as those who were never saved.

I guess question boils down to this: Is God's punishment against the disobedient Christian up to but not including - or up to and including - the Second Death? I'd encourage everyone to postpone their conclusion until the many formidable challenges on the discussion table against OSAS are considered, not just set to one side because the conclusion might be unwelcome

Paul says the things written in old times were written "for our learning" - we who are the heirs of salvation: God provided the people of the OT with "Cities of Refuge" - places where a person who killed another without premeditation could flee for protection. By remaining inside the gates of the city, he was protected from lawful vengeance by the hand of the "blood avenger" - a close relative of the deceased - where he was required to remain until the death of the high priest, after which he was free from harm and could rejoin the society of Israel. In 2 Samuel 2, Abner reluctantly killed Asahel, Joab's younger brother. Asahel apparently saw an opportunity to gain fame by killing Abner, fame that Abner was not too keen on having Asahel gain. After warning him twice to back off, Abner had no choice but to defend himself by spearing Asahel "under the fifth rib". Later, when Abner was in Hebron - a city of refuge - Joab tricked Abner into stepping just outside the gates of the city, and there stabbed him to death "under the fifth rib" - the same way Asahel was killed. Abner died "as a fool" because he didn't make sure to remain inside of the city! So, what does any of this have to do with Christianity? 1. Sinners are guilty of manslaughter - by our sins, we caused the death of God's dear Son. 2. God has every right to avenge the death of His Son against us. 3. We need a City of Refuge in which to flee. 4. Jesus is that "City of Refuge" in which the Christian is to flee for salvation. 5. We must remain in Jesus until He removes His High Priest robes, puts on His kingly robes, and returns in glory. This is what Jesus meant by His command to "abide in the Vine" - to remain permanently in the bosom of our Savior, never to step out even once from under the safety of His saving grace which covers our guilt, lest we end up lost. We are not "Once Saved, Always Saved" - we're free to choose to remain in the safety of Jesus, or return to indulging the sinful habits of the flesh...but we cannot divide our time between the Divine Vine of Jesus and the Holly (wood) tree of Satan, for the one grows on holy ground, and the other is rooted in the soil of death and destruction. We must "confesseth and forsaketh" sin. We must remain inside the city, dear saint, and not allow the enemy's temptations to lure us outside the gates "as a fool to his folly."

Exactly! Now that's true Bible "eternal security" we can all embrace - we're eternally secure as long as we remain inside the antitypical "city of refuge" - Jesus. People need to read about what Joab did to Abner when he stepped outside the gates of Hebron...and just as king David said Abner died "as a fool", it will be no less said of those in the Judgment who think they can divide their time between the Divine Vine and Satan's Holly tree.

I've heard some argue that "endure to the end" and "be saved" has nothing to do with saints winding up lost, but refers to "enduring to the end of the 7 year tribulation without getting killed". Of course, no indication Jesus here refers to any "7 year tribulation" nor would He who makes the blind see, the lame walk, the dead rise waste precious words telling us about saints "getting killed" especially when He's told us over and over that persecution is the lot of the saint. No, He's warning the saints that widespread iniquity is going to rob many of their salvation both by the practice of it by saints and by the use of it by sinners to offend saints.

Hosea: >1. If we look with the eye of faith, we see Hosea, a young man of God just starting out, perhaps his eye on a certain young girl, a virgin if you please, that he thought to marry and have walk with him through his ministry. But, the Word of the Lord came and said, "Hosea, I want you to marry a prostitute". Reluctantly, for sure, he obeyed the command of the Lord and went to the red light district, found himself a harlot, lifted her up from the filth, gave her a name, children, a good home, and resolved himself to be the subject of endless rounds of gossip - "Why, girl...didja hear about that preacher who married a prostitute?" >2. After a while, that woman turned wild again and she went back to her old trade in flesh, and it broke that poor man's heart to pieces...you can believe that. >3. Later, she fell on hard times and was to be sold into slavery, and perhaps Hosea heard about it and thought, "Good...after all I've done for her...good" like many of us might say...but, while Hosea may have been tempted with that, the Word of the Lord came to him and said, "Hosea, I want you to go down to the auction...and when they put her on the auction block, I want you to start bidding...and nobody must outbid you, so take plenty money with you". >4. And at that auction, when they set that shameful woman on the block and started the bidding, her head hanging in shame, dress dirty, hair a mess, everytime a stranger would raise the ante, a familiar voice would go up a bit higher. Eventually, she looked out through that messed hair and saw a familiar face...it was her husband out there, and he kept on bidding, and kept on, until finally the auctioneer said, "'Going once, going twice, SOLD TO THAT PREACHER OVER THERE". >5. And, I imagine he went up to that shameful woman, and he didn't grab her or treat her roughly or speak harshly...no, no, he took her gently by the hand...DID SHE DESERVE THAT? No, no, no, but he took her by the hand...spoke gently to her in her ear...and he led her tenderly down the steps and they started again toward home. After all she'd put that man through, and after all the love he showed her despite that, is it possible she put away her unfaithfulness and loved that man as he deserved from then on? So, what's our problem with habitual sin and why does the OSAS crowd defend it instead of deciding it's time for a soteriological gut check?

I can't understand how the OSAS crowd - a crowd which would have the rest of us believe they've cornered the market of knowledge concerning God's love and compassion and faithfulness - is blind to the fact that God gave us the MARRIAGE COVENANT between husband and wife as an EXAMPLE of the kind of intimate relationship He desires with us...blindness which is evidenced by the fact that they expect God to tolerate habitual unfaithfulness, while they themselves are ready to divorce by the mere discovery of a hidden playboy magazine.

No, friend, the reason the OSAS crowd interprets verses which prove Conditional Salvation as "diminished number of crown jewels" is because you all demanded a verdict before all evidence had a chance to speak, and then proceed to answer any OSAS challenges with stubborn platitudes derived from the same. A baby born to loving parents will die if separated from them. Nevertheless, the OSAS crowd must be willing to argue that: >cold agape is sufficient agape yet mere lukewarm agape is spitworthy. >those unable to be renewed again unto repentance were never saved. >the command to abide is unnecessary because we can't depart. >withered and dead is alive and well? >a branch's burning fruit and a burning branch itself are indistinct.