'Sanctuary system replaced' by what?

SSL:
Crucified and Risen

GE:
Mark, <crucified> and <<risen>> --- not Crucified and Raised.

SSL:
Read for This Week’s Study:Matt. 27:11-26; John 3:19; Isa. 59:2; Matt. 27:45, 46, 49-54; Heb. 8:1-6; Matt. 28:1-20.
Our Crucified Substitute
“Now from the sixth hour until the ninth hour there was darkness over all the land. And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, ‘Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?’ that is, ‘My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?’” (Matt. 27:45, 46, NKJV). What is the meaning of this cry? How do we understand its implications in terms of the plan of salvation?

GE:
Mark, not our Resurrected Substitute

SSL:
Torn Veil and Rent Rocks

Each Gospel writer told the story of Jesus from various perspectives, but all focused on His death. Matthew alone, though, records the opening of the graves after the temple veil was torn.

ReadMatthew 27:49-54. What is the meaning of these events? What hope do they point to for us?

Jesus died right after the mob, in ignorance of Jesus’ real words, mocked Him about having Elijah come to save Him. Their mockery was another powerful but sad example of how Jesus has been misunderstood by many of His own people.

Matthew then records that the curtain in the temple was torn from top to bottom. The symbolism is unmistakable: a new era in salvation history had begun. The sacrificial services, for so long pointing to Jesus, were no longer necessary.The old earthly type was now replaced by something so much better.

Read Hebrews 8:1-6. What do these texts say that help us to understand what happened to the earthly sanctuary system and what has replaced it?

Matthew records not only the tearing of the veil but the rocks splitting, the graves opening, and some of the dead being raised—events that could happen only because of what Jesus had accomplished by dyingas our Substitute for sin. So here in Matthew, we can see things happening that the old system itself could never have caused. “For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins” (Heb. 10:4, NKJV). Of course, only Jesus could take away sins, and for us the great result, the great promise, of Jesus’ taking away our sins is the resurrection from death. Without that promise, we have nothing (see 1 Cor. 15:13, 14, 19). In these early resurrections (we don’t know how many), we can see the hope and promise of our resurrection at the end of this age.

The Risen Christ

GE:
Mark, not the Raised Christ.

SLL:
The Christian faith centers not only on the cross but on the empty tomb.

GE:
Note, not with Jesus in the tomb.

SLL:
The truth is, the majority of people in the world, including non-Christians, believe that a man named Jesus of Nazareth died on a cross. Not long after Jesus lived we find historical references such as this one from Tacitus, a Roman historian: “Nero … inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians … by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.”—Tacitus, A.D. 57-117 (www.causeofjesusdeath.com/jesus-in-secular-history).

There’s little debate, then or now, about whether a historical figure named Jesus was condemned and crucified.

 

The hard part is the Resurrection: the idea that Jesus of Nazareth, who was dead on a Friday afternoon, became alive again on a Sunday morning. That is what many people struggle with. After all, a Jew crucified by the Romans in Judea was a fairly common occurrence. But a Jew raised from the dead after being crucified? That’s another matter entirely.

Yet, without this belief in a risen Jesus, we simply do not have a Christian faith. Paul wrote: “If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith … If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied” (1 Cor. 15:14, 19, NIV). Jesus’ death itself had to be followed by His resurrection, because in His resurrection we have the surety of our own.

When we come to the story of the resurrection of Jesus, we have two options. The first option is to view this story as sentimental propaganda written by a few lonely followers of Jesus to keep His memory alive, the way we try to keep the memory alive when a well-known figure dies today. The second option when we come to the story of the Resurrection is to take it literally, a firsthand accountof an extraordinary event, an event later interpreted to have implications for every human being who ever lived.

ReadMatthew 28:1-15. Why does Jesus tell the women (in verse 9) to “rejoice” (NKJV)? Of course, they can be glad that He was resurrected, that their Master came back. But what is the real reason to rejoice at the resurrection of Jesus?

GE:
Note, the real reason is <something better> than the Resurrection to rejoice at.

 

SSL:
As did all the other Gospel writers, Matthew wrote about the resurrection of Jesus. Also, as did his fellow writers, he wrote next to nothing about what the meaning of the Resurrection itself was. Though they depicted the story of the Resurrection, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John gave us no real theological explanation of it, even though it’s so central to the Christian faith. It’s in Paul’s writings that we get the most detailed explanation about the meaning of the cross. “But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive” (1 Cor. 15:20-22, NKJV). Paul also wrote that we have been “buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead”(Col. 2:12, NKJV). Peter, too, has something to say on this crucial topic: “There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 3:21, NKJV). Though we don’t know why the Gospel writers didn’t go into any detailed explanation, some scholars have seen this as more evidence of the truthfulness of their accounts. After all, writing many years after the events, why didn’t they use this opportunity to give a detailed explanation of what they wanted people to believe about the Resurrection? If it were a fraud or a con, why not take the opportunity to make it mean whatever they wanted it to mean? Instead, they simply tell the story, making no attempt to embellish it with any theological explanations as to what it all was supposed to mean.

Discussion Questions:
At the moment of Jesus’ death, the temple curtain from the Old Covenant was torn from top to bottom, and a New Covenant was ushered in, presided over by a new High Priest, Jesus Christ. “Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, and having a High Priest over the house of God,” (Heb. 10:19-21, NKJV). How does it make you feel to realize that Christ Himself now serves as our High Priest?

Matthew’s Gospel covered so many subjects, so many topics. What things in particular struck you regarding how Jesus was presented here? How can studying this Gospel help you better to understand what it means to be a Christian and to follow the teachings of Jesus?

GE:
<<Matthew records>> Matthew recorded many things the other Gospels have not.

<<for us the great result, the great promise, of Jesus’ taking away our sins is the resurrection from death.>>

The great result, the great promise, of Jesus’ taking away our sins through death, was, His, Resurrection from death in our place for the taking away of our sins once for all <<… because in His resurrection we have the surety of our own>> forgiveness as well as resurrection. For us the great promise of Jesus’ Resurrection is the taking away of our sins, and the great result is both our forgiveness of sin and justification, and—on strength of His Resurrection—our guaranteed resurrection from the dead at Jesus’ coming again. “If Christ had not been and is not raised yet [‘egehgertai’ Perfect Indicative], ye are yet in your sins and your faith is vain”—even at Jesus’ coming again. 1Corinthians 15:17.

 

GE:

What is <<theology>>?
Here, is a perfect example of what <<theology>> can be, <<As did all the other Gospel writers, Matthew wrote about the resurrection of Jesus. Also, as did his fellow writers, he wrote next to nothing about what the meaning of the Resurrection itself was. Though they depicted the story of the Resurrection, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John gave us no real theological explanation of it, even though it’s so central to the Christian faith.>>

Now such <<theology>> as this, one most definitely and definitively won’t find in the Gospels or in any one of the Gospels. Because the Gospels don’t know what defeatism is, or betrayal of their own most magnificent portrayal and proclamation “so that you may know what…” the true Theology of the Gospels, to wit, “what the all-exceeding GREATNESS of God’s power to us-ward who believe, is, namely, that Power according to the working of GOD’S MIGHTY STRENGTH WHICH HE WROUGHT / WORKED / FINISHED IN CHRIST IN HAVING RAISED HIM FROM THE DEAD” … “the LORD IS A MAN OF WAR … THE LORD TRIUMPHED GLORIOUSLY”! Which is the Gospels’ <<theology>> of Jesus’ Resurrection in its total encompassment. This is that declaration, uttered in Isaiah 57:15, concerning “this Jesus whom ye, man, crucified…”, that “BEING-RESTED-UP-AGAIN HIS NAME IS THE MOST HOLY PLACE”— “Most Holy Place, Our Heavenly Sanctuary, the Innermost Temple of “GOD-IN-CHRIST RECONCILING the world unto Himself” ‘in Full Fellowship of the Trinity’. (Klaas Schilder)

Yes, this is Paul’s <theology> of Jesus’ Resurrection— the Grand Finale in the <theology> of the Gospels. This is it although no Gospel contains an actual description of Jesus’ Resurrection in Indicative terms of speech. And this is it—the Gospels’ <theology> of Jesus’ Resurrection, although it is in only Matthew that the actual circumstance, events, personae involved, and time and day of Jesus’ Resurrection, are found recorded. Because the Resurrection of Jesus Christ right from the start has in all four Gospels been the <<central>> and culminating <theological> Truth TOWARDS WHICH ALL OTHERS DRIVE.

For no moment does any Gospel attempt to water down any importance of the Resurrection of Jesus. For no moment do the Gospels depreciate Jesus’ Resurrection through scares use of words. On the contrary, precisely for the absolute Divineness and absolutely divine impetus of the super human occurrence of Jesus’ Resurrection, do the Gospels use as few as possible words and try they not to build a <theology> around it, but rather to make Jesus’ Resurrection their message and substance and essence of <theology>.

And that is why three of the four evangelists don’t mention a word of the historically real act of God in Christ when He raised Christ from the dead. Their silence is their <theology>; their saying nothing is their ‘speaking of God’ concerning the truth and the greatness of the event. They must have found it impossible to comment on. THEY ACCEPTED AND BELIEVED IT A PRIORI WITHOUT SAYING.

And that is why only Matthew of the four Gospels tells of that about which the others do not mention a word, presenting to his readers the real act of God in historical circumstance when He raised Christ from the dead “and there was a great earthquake and the angel of the Lord from heaven descending with the brilliance of his appearing cast the stone away from the grave and went and sat on it.” Only Matthew stated these great deeds of God when He raised up Christ again from the dead— which fact does not diminish, but magnifies the importance of Jesus’ Resurrection.

 

GE:
Now mark, because of this importance, what— again only Matthew— had to say about when “God … according to the Spirit-of-Holiness … by the Glory of the Father … raised Christ … from the dead in newness of Life … according to the Spirit-of-Holiness”! Romans 6:4; 1:4. Matthew wrote, “… explained / answered / informed the angel the women …”!

<<Matthew’s Gospel covered so many subjects, so many topics. What things in particular struck you regarding how Jesus was presented here?>>

This, that only Matthew uses the word, “explained / answered / informed”—[apokritheis].

The angel explained these <<inexhaustible truths regarding our Lord’s death and resurrection>>; these <<subjects … topics>>.

<<Matthew alone … records the opening of the graves after the temple veil was torn.>> Matthew recorded what “The angel explained to the women”. [[The angel explained to the women what happened at the same time while <<the temple veil was torn>>— not what happened <<after the temple veil was torn>> or had been torn.]]

<<Matthew records not only the tearing of the veil but the rocks splitting, the graves opening…>> as soon as Jesus had died, <<and some of the dead being raised…>> “after the resurrection”; not after Jesus had died . . . <<—events that could happen only because of what Jesus had accomplished>> “after the resurrection”; not only <<by dying as our Substitute for sin>>, but by RISING FROM THE DEAD “TRIUMPHING IN IT” his Resurrection from the dead! Colossians 2:15.

<<So here in Matthew, we can see things happening that the old system itself could never have caused>> but which in fact went directly contrary <<the old system itself>>, like “the angel explained to the women … the Jews the morning after the Preparation Day (the morning next after Friday afternoon) connived with Pilate that the grave must be sealed for the third day ‘that deceiver’ said he would rise on when he was still alive. BUT, BEHOLD, LATE ON THE SABBATH IN THE MID-AFTERNOON DAYLIGHT as it began to dawn towards the First Day of the week, there was a GREAT EARTHQUAKE AND THE ANGEL OF THE LORD DESCENDING … CASTING THE STONE AWAY FROM THE TOMB….”

So here in Matthew, we see things happening that NEITHER the old system NOR Jesus’ death itself alone EVER could have caused. For here in Matthew alone, we with the eye of faith do see Jesus’ RESURRECTION happen— the only and direct and “all else exclusive” cause and basis and reason, and Essence and Power and Substance, of God’s Glory and Power Manifested in and through Jesus Christ God’s Son, “so that we may know what His Inheritance in the saints, is”, would be and, will be in their, Resurrection of Life.

 

SSL:

Quote-‘At the moment of Jesus’ death, the temple curtain from the Old Covenant was torn from top to bottom, and a New Covenant was ushered in, presided over by a new High Priest, Jesus Christ. “Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, and having a High Priest over the house of God,” (Heb. 10:19-21, NKJV). How does it make you feel to realize that Christ Himself now serves as our High Priest?’-QE

GE:
The composers of this Sabbath school lesson obiter dictum nevertheless obviously are here inferring and alluding to Jesus’ present intermediating or intercessory ministration, because He, according to them, continued and must still finish his atonement in the ‘Most Holy Place’ of the ‘heavenly sanctuary’. They therefore have to skip over Jesus’ Resurrection as though it did not finish the <<sacrifice for atonement>> which Jesus is still busy <<offering his blood in heaven>> for. That’s why they ‘ask’, <<How does it make you feel to realize that Christ Himself serves as our High Priest?>>— implying that Jesus did not at, or through, his Resurrection <<serve as our Atoning High Priest>>, but as soon as possible after his Resurrection had to go to heaven because —according to SDA doctrine—, He could not be Mediatory High Priest while He was on earth. So the sooner and smoother the transition from Cross and Sacrifice to <<something better>> than Jesus’ Resurrection causing obstruction in between, namely, to <<High Priestly ministration>> and <Final Atonement in the Most Holy in heaven>, the better. It was THEREFORE that the compilers of this Sabbath school lesson made their contumelious comments regarding the Gospel writer’s deficiency in, and lack of <<resurrection theology>>, and in place of the Gospels’ <theology>, recommended their own <<something better>>, which <<something better>> (for anyone who might have known) is Mrs E.G. White in ‘Desire of Ages’, pages 789,790 Quote: ‘What a day is this to the world! … Jesus refused to receive the homage of His people until He had the assurance that His sacrifice was accepted by the Father. He ascended to the heavenly courts, and from God Himself heard the assurance that His atonement for the sins of men had been ample, that through His blood all might gain eternal life. The Father ratified the covenant made with Christ, that He would receive repentant and obedient men, and would love them even as He loves His Son. Christ was to complete His work, and fulfill His pledge to "make a man more precious than fine gold; even a man than the golden wedge of Ophir." Isa. 13:12. All power in heaven and on earth was given to the Prince of Life, and He returned to His followers in a world of sin, that He might impart to them of His power and glory.
While the Saviour was in God's presence, receiving gifts for His church, the disciples thought upon His empty tomb, and mourned and wept. The day that was a day of rejoicing to all heaven…QE

GE:
It was on Sunday, on the day after Jesus’ Resurrection Sabbath. SDA have not yet recovered God’s appointed times. They have fallen behind as they left Jesus’ Resurrection Sabbath behind in spiritual Egypt. Their <theology> has become pure Sunday Resurrection <theology>. Here, in this Sabbath school lesson is SDA <<Sabbath theology>> exposed for everyone to read. <<…lest the Sundaydarians rejoice…>> [See D.F. Nichol ‘Answers to Objections’]

 

SSL:
<<Read for This Week’s Study: …….Matt. 28:1-20>>, the SSL says.

GE:
Where do we find Matthew 28:1-4 though, in this Week’s Study? Here, where we find Hebrews 10:19-21 inserted in its place.

SSL:
Quote-‘At the moment of Jesus’ death, the temple curtain from the Old Covenant was torn from top to bottom, and a New Covenant was ushered in, presided over by a new High Priest, Jesus Christ. “Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, and having a High Priest over the house of God,” (Heb. 10:19-21, NKJV). How does it make you feel to realize that Christ Himself now serves as our High Priest?’-QE

GE:
Where do we find Matthew 28:1-4? In the Scriptures where we read in Matthew already from chapter 27:66 up to and through 28:1-4 of the day on which Christ Himself served as our High Priest, “reconciling us to God”— where we read of the day on which Christ Himself served as our High Priest and “saved us BY HIS LIFE”— where we read of the day that we in Christ who Himself served as our High Priest, “received the atonement” (Romans 5:10,11) and already have received full reconciliation, peace and rest in Christ Himself who served as our High Priest thanks to His Resurrection from the dead— THERE, we read in this SSL, instead, dismissal and disclaimer <<about what the meaning of the Resurrection itself was>> and denial of the <<real theological explanation of it (the Resurrection itself), even though it’s so central to the Christian faith.>>

Plus, we read there, where Matthew 27:66 to 28:4 and the day of Jesus’ Resurrection belongs, instead, a completely out of context and irrelevant referral back, to “this Jesus WHOM YE CRUCIFIED”, instead of Matthew’s referral to “this same Jesus GOD RAISED UP AND EXALTED: CHRIST AND LORD” within Matthew 27:66 to 28:4.

Note, Hebrews 10:19-21 speaks of “having an High Priest over the house of God”— in the first part, speaking of Christ Crucified, “Therefore, brethren, having an High Priest over the house of God, we have boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus” [dead in Christ], and in the last part, speaking of Christ Resurrected, “Therefore, brethren, having a High Priest over the house of God, we have boldness toenter … by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh.” [alive in Christ]

This SSL claims the Gospels Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John <<depicted the story of the Resurrection>> but mentions no word relevant to <<the story>>. In fact this SSL deliberately removed the text that is relevant to <<the story>> of Jesus’ Resurrection like the murderer in an Agatha Christie story would remove the corpse of his victim from the murder scene, and would leave distracting and misleading ‘evidence’ on the scene. But let justice be done to that which the Gospels truthfully do tell concerning Jesus’ Resurrection … NEVER! Because it would <MEAN> the demise of SDA FALSE doctrine, like first and foremost, the SDA doctrine of an <<Investigative Judgment>> and <<Final Atonement>> going on <<in the heavenly sanctuary since 1844>>.

And so I have given you the answer required of everyone who studied this SLL to the question, <<The sanctuary system and what has replaced it?>> with Scripture, upon Scripture.

So now this whole ‘issue’ about
<<why the Gospel writers didn’t go into any detailed explanation>>, or,
<<why didn’t they use this opportunity to give a detailed explanation of what they wanted people to believe about the Resurrection?>>, or,
<<If it were a fraud or a con, why not take the opportunity to make it mean whatever they wanted it to mean?>>, or,
<<Instead, … (why not) simply tell the story, making no attempt to embellish it with any theological explanations as to what it all was supposed to mean?>>
has been solved, by simply finding the Scripture answer to one, the simplest of questions possible, which is,

When did the high priest of the earthly tabernacle “CLEANSE THE SANCTUARY”—
When he went INTO the most holy place?
or,
When he came out of the most holy place?

I have asked this question to Seventh-day Adventists for the last twenty years. You think they have answered me?
Decide for yourself about the truthfulness or deceitfulness of my analysis of this SSL.
God be with you and bless you all

 

When did the high priest of the earthly tabernacle “CLEANSE THE SANCTUARY”—

When he went INTO the most holy place?

or,

When he came out of the most holy place?


The correct answer also will be the answer to the question why the Gospels say so little or nothing directly about Jesus’ Resurrection.


The Gospels specifically regarding Jesus’ Resurrection, recorded only Matthew 28 verses 1 to 4; and regarding the day of the events and circumstances on the day of Jesus’ Resurrection, of the Gospels it is only Matthew which has 27:62-66 to 28:1-4.


Only Luke 23:54-56 and John 19:42 mention the preparations of the Jews that led up to the Day of Jesus’ Resurrection; and only Mark 16:1 refers back to that Resurrection Day. But no Gospel tells that Jesus’ Resurrection happened or how it happened on that day. All that meets the eye in letters, is SILENCE—the silence OF That Day.


Silence … because That Day is typified in Old Testament Prophesy through mainly two feasts—the two Resurrection feasts—the silent feasts of The Day of Atonement and The Day of First Sheaf Waved Before the Lord.


At this time I shall only quickly refer to “First Sheaf Wave Offering Day”, “the third day”, “thick darkness covered the land”, ‘like an omen of death’ when the children of Israel found themselves sore pressed between the chariots of the Pharaoh of Egypt and the Red Sea, “And Moses said unto the People, fear ye not, STAND STILL and see the Salvation of the LORD which He, will shew you today … the LORD, shall fight for you. … Thus the LORD, saved, Israel That Day. … Thy Right Hand o LORD, is become glorious in Power. … Fear and dread shall fall upon them; by the greatness of Thine Arm they shall be as STILL AS A STONE TILL THY PEOPLE which Thou hast purchased, PASS OVER. Thou shalt BRING THEM IN and plant them in the mountain of Thine Inheritance, in the PLACE, O LORD, which Thy Hands have established. … Sing ye to the LORD for HE, triumphed gloriously.


“On the fifteenth day of the month the LORD brought the children of Israel OUT of Egypt”— “the day after”, “Moses commanded them, STAND STILL and see the Salvation of the LORD.” “On (this) day the priest shall wave the sheaf before the LORD TO BE ACCEPTED FOR YOU.”

While the people “stood still and watchedthe salvation of the LORD” in humble, worshipful, SILENT expectation, the LORD accepted the Sheaf of Joseph and the twelve tribes of Jacob bent low before the LORD.


Then there is the ‘Great Day of Atonement’ or ‘Solemn Day of Repentance and Judgment” that received fulfilment through Jesus’ Death and Resurrection. It was a Great Day of silence, heart-searching and contrition. Also on This Day the people STOOD STILL and waited and SAW the Salvation of the LORD.


They SAW while they did NOT see, because the high priest ONLY ONCE in a year, ENTERED in behind the veil of the most holy of the tabernacle. Light reached not inside— not daylight, not candlelight. Inside was The Most Holy under skin upon skin of sacrifice. The LORD was Light Inside. The Shadow of the Almighty—the Glory of the LORD—was Flaming Sword Covering over the mercy seat above the ark of the testimony.


Inside was as the sound of mighty waters streaming from the throne of God. Outside was as silence like the grave. Joseph and Nicodemus had closed the grave and had left and gone back home. The women, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary too, had gone home and there stood nobody. The land, the Skull, the Olive Mount, hidden and in darkness, lay grave and stone, one whole night long “the women rested the Sabbath according to commandment”, when “in the morning after the Preparation…” with noise and consternation “…came the Jews” and hundred Roman guards. “And they secured the tomb, sealing the stone and setting the guard—BUT IN THE FULLNESS OF THE SABBATH IN THE MID-AFTERNOON OF THE SABBATH as it began to dawn towards the First Day of the week … BEHOLD! THERE WAS A GREAT EARTHQUAKE … THE ANGEL OF THE LORD FROM HEAVEN DESCENDING THE BRIGHTNESS OF HIS APPEARING CASTING THE STONE AWAY FROM THE GRAVE …” AND “CHRIST ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES ON THE THIRD DAY ROSE FROM THE DEAD”.


That is why even the Roman Catholics invented the name of ‘Still’, ‘Saturday’ for That Sabbath Day.


It was the Day of GOD’S works He “concerning the Seventh Day spake, And GOD, the day The Seventh Day from ALL, HIS, WORKS, RESTED”—“rested”, “IN THE SON”, through RAISING THE SON “FROM THE DEAD” in the stillness of the grave of the Dead raised in honour “by the Glory of the Father”.


No human was fit, to hear or see or even know, about why the Gospel writers gave us no detailed information about the Resurrection of Jesus. “No man can see God and live.” Not even a sinless creature like an angel can see God working, energising to the exceeding greatness of the strength of his power RAISING CHRIST” : “FROM THE DEAD” : “according to the Scriptures” : in the sanctuary of his grave, AND LIVE!

How can the Gospels depict what the Resurrection itself was, while no one saw it happen, rather, while no one was able to see it happen—No! while every man was forbidden to observe it!?

Though neither Mark, nor Luke, nor John gives us real explanation of Jesus’ Resurrection, the fact can never be minimized or slighted or ignored or spiritualized away that Matthew DOES GIVE us the most central to the Christian faith information, about it.


Said Paul, “Do not think above the Scriptures.”

 

When did the high priest of the earthly tabernacle “CLEANSE THE SANCTUARY”—

When he went INTO the most holy place?

or,

When he came out of the most holy place?


2Chronicles 29:15-17

2Chronicles 23:12-21

Leviticus 23:43

Leviticus 16:10,11

Leviticus 16:17-19 This is the “END OF RECOLILIATION.” The priest “shall go OUT (from “within the veil”, v15) and shall CLEANSE (the altar) and hallow it from the uncleanness of the children of Israel. And when he hath made an end of reconciling the (most) holy and the tabernacle of the congregation (‘holy place’), and the altar, he SHALL BRING THE LIVE GOAT … AWAY … AND LET GO.”

 

SSL:

Matthew records not only the tearing of the veil but the rocks splitting, the graves opening, and some of the dead being raised—events that could happen only because of what Jesus had accomplished by dying as our Substitute for sin. So here in Matthew, we can see things happening that the old system itself could never have caused. “For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins” (Heb. 10:4, NKJV). Of course, only Jesus could take away sins, andfor us the great result, the great promise, of Jesus’ taking away our sins is the resurrection from death. Without that promise, we have nothing (see 1 Cor. 15:13, 14, 19).


GE:

<<Of course>> the presupposition in this statement is that <<the great result, the great promise, of Jesus’ taking away our sins is the resurrection from death … for us>>—not Jesus’, Resurrection, but our, resurrection.

And the presupposition for what <<for us>> would be <<the resurrection from death>>, is <<of course … the promise>> of <<Jesus’ taking away our sins … promise(d)>> in that He would ‘finish the atonement in the heavenly sanctuary’ according to SDA doctrine. <<Without that promise, we have nothing.>>

To have only Jesus’ Resurrection for the finished <<taking away of our sins>>, is to <<have nothing>>—no forgiveness of sins, no atonement, no resurrection.

<<(see 1 Cor. 15:13,14,19)…for us…the resurrection from death>>.

It says <<next to nothing about what the meaning of [Jesus’] Resurrection itself was>>, and gives <<no real theological explanation of it>>. Jesus’ Resurrection itself, <<was>>; it has, no future <promise>, and will have, no <result> <<for us>> or for our resurrection.

What empty, false, remark therefore to close with, <<… even though it’s so central to the Christian faith>>!