Tag: Teaching

Posted on

Help from our High Priest

When one finds oneself in the depths of a temptation that is almost overpowering. And the enemy assails you, you ask Jesus for help. However when you ask Jesus for help you do it with a few things firmly in mind. First you ask for help knowing that Jesus Understands the plight of your soul for Jesus decided to place himself in the depths of human woe. It would have been an infinite humiliation for Jesus to come as Adam in the garden, but Jesus decided to take on the seed of Abraham so that he could be a merciful and faithful high priest. (Hebrews 2:16-17).

Second you ask for help knowing that Jesus can help you in the problem you are dealing with. But more than taking on the seed of Abraham, Jesus was tempted in all points like as we are yet without sin (Hebrews 4:15). We can say with all assurance that Jesus Understand not just by omniscience, but by experience the depths of temptation for he was tempted and therefore he can be merciful and faithful (Hebrews 2:18).

So when temptation assails us, we can go to Jesus and call out to him. And when we call on Jesus, we can know we have a faithful and merciful High Priest listening. And that High Priest knows exactly how much strength is needed to overcome the temptation. That High Priest knows exactly how much grace we need. And thus we can boldy come to the throne of grace to obtain the mercy (Hebrews 4:16) that our brother (Jesus is not ashamed to call us Brethren Hebrews 2:11) will give us. And then after God gives us the grace that is needed to overcome, then Jesus puts on a little more extra grace for where sin abounds, grace much more abounds (Romans 5:20). And then we can sing the song with James Cleveland “Victory Shall be Mine.”

Posted on

Three Views on the Sabbath

I was reading Dr. Bacchiocchi’s book The Sabbath in the New Testament: answers to questions. In the first chapter Dr. Bacchiochi presents three understandings of the Sabbath’s relation to the New Testament which serves as a backdrop for this whole presentation.

Abrogation View

Certainly we as Sabbatarians have heard this view. The understanding is that the Sabbath of the Old Testament was removed at the cross of Jesus Christ. The view rests on the belief that there is a “radical discontinuity between the Old and New Testaments.”

Throughout history Martin Luther, Anabaptists, leftist Puritans, Quakers, Mennonites, Hutterites, and many antinomian denominations have all held to this view according to Bacchiocchi.

The basic problem is that the view rests on an assumption of a radical break between the Old and the New Testament. The basic question is, was the break between Judaism and Christianity as clean as this view would have us to believe? There are many who would argue that Judaism and Christianity were not two religions at that time, but the Christians were simply “Jews who Believed in Jesus Christ.” The idea of a radical break does not seem to be the view of the New Testament or early Christian history. We will come back to this in later posts.

Transference View

The next view is the transference view. This is the understanding that there is truly continuity between the Old and New Testament, and thus the Sabbath commandment still has relevance and validity for contemporary Christians.

However, proponents of this view state that the ceremonial aspects of the Sabbath commandment have been done away with. In this view the moral aspect of the commandment is in the principle of “one day in seven” while particularly the “seventh day” is a ceremonial aspect pointing back that was abrograted. St. Thomas Aquinas taught this moral-ceremonial distinction.

John Calvin, according to Bacchiocchi, clarified this understanding by stating that the moral aspect is the function of the day which was to allow God to “work in us, provide time for church services, and to protect dependent workers.”

This view is largely held by those in the Reformed tradition like Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, and English Puritans. You can find my own critique of a presentation by T. D. Jakes where he takes a view like this one.

The basic problem here is that it rests on an artificial distinction between moral and ceremonial aspects of the Sabbath. In short the Sabbath is never talked about in such terms. One would not be able to find this distinction taught in the scriptures themselves.

Permanence of the Sabbath View

Bacchiochi’s (and my) position is that the New Testament does not nullify the Sabbath, but clarifies the Sabbath. As I continue to look at this book I will discuss more of what Bacchiocchi means by that.

Conclusion

The Sabbath is even today still in great dispute. I think some sort of classification scheme is necessary to understand different perspectives on the Sabbath. I am going to think about this scheme a little more especially in light of the “New Covenant Christian” argument against the validity of Sabbath keeping for contemporary Christians.

Be that as it may, Bacchiocchi distills a ton of information in this short chapter of this important work.

Posted on

Sanctuary Message Pitfalls

A few years ago, an elder presented a series of studies on the Sanctuary to a church that I was visiting. In this particular presentation, the elder attempted to provide a synopsis of the Sanctuary message. In that presentation the elder decided to take a “celestial geography” approach to the Sanctuary message and went on and on about each piece of the sanctuary.

The elder described the table of shewbread and said that it represented Jesus as the bread of life. He continued and described the 7 branched candlestick and noted that Jesus was the light of the world. He finally talked about about the ark of the covenant and decided to ask the people if it represented Jesus’ or the Father’s throne. Finally, a middle aged woman asked a simple question, “What does this have to do with my salvation?” The elder never answered the question. He simply kept talking about arcane facts related to the pieces of the Sanctuary.

Just the Furniture

Most don’t even begin to look at the subject, but many of those that do fall into one of a few traps. That elder fell into one of the common pitfalls that make the Sanctuary message irrelevant. Please note, the elder attempted to be “Christ-centered” in that the arcane facts were about Christ, but the message was not connected to humanity in any real way. The elder never tried to answer the question “so what.” And then when the woman asked him “so what” he acted like he never even considered the question. Even if you are talking about Christ, you may even consider it to be “Christ Centered,” but if it has no importance to daily living it becomes something that may be interesting to my head, but irrelevant for my feet or how I walk….

This is not to say that architecture is irrelevant, however I do question using a presentation on celestial architecture when you are attempting to introduce people to the essentials of that message.

Calculation Only?

Another pitfall that seeks to separate the Sanctuary message from human living is the one that makes it only about a mathematical calculation. There are some preachers who only talk about the sanctuary in terms of mathematics and thus people lose the connection to daily living. I do not wish to diminish the calculation, but simply going to Daniel 7 to demonstrate that the judgment takes place after 1798, and then moving to Daniel 8-9 to find a starting and ending point for the judgment still leaves us questioning “so what.”

Judgment Only

Another component that is common is to only teach the judgment. And this judgment takes one of two forms. One is a scary “your name may come up tonight” kind of idea. Here the judgment is something you better be ready or else. Another approach is for the judgment to be an innocuous declaration of our salvation that we should spend no time worrying about. In the innocuous version we have an irrelevant appendage that does nothing for the gospel and in the other we have a fearful “get ready” command without any added help in the getting ready. In both cases we have the help missing.

Cleansing the Missing Component

sanctu1While it was a strong component of our teaching by the pioneers, we have lost the cleansing aspect that was in the type and described in Leviticus 16:30. We have lost the cleansing on earth that is to correspond with the cleansing in the heavens.

Here is relevance. Now some would argue that it is not Biblical. Some may argue that it is not true, but no one will argue that it is irrelevant like the toothless declaration that you are saved only judgment or the mathematical calculation alone.

Conclusion

In short, the Sanctuary Message must be Christ centered, for that is the only place for power, in addition it must retain this connection to humanity, this cleansing of the world in preparation for the second advent of Jesus Christ. The Great High Priest in heaven is seeking to forgive and to cleanse us of all unrighteousness, it is our job to work with Jesus in this great work.