The SDA 28 Fundamentals has IJ as one of those pillars that upholds the platform we stand on. To my surprise I have noted some of the saints around here do not think there is any Investigative Judgement. So let us see if there is a Investigative Judgement or not. I have also noted that the same Saints do not subscribe to the writings of E G White. So I would prefer that we use the Bible only.
The SDA church does have the Investigative Judgement as one of its 28 fundamentals Quoting:
24. Christ's Ministry in the Heavenly Sanctuary:
There is a sanctuary in heaven, the true tabernacle which the Lord set up and not man. In it Christ ministers on our behalf, making available to believers the benefits of His atoning sacrifice offered once for all on the cross. He was inaugurated as our great High Priest and began His intercessory ministry at the time of His ascension. In 1844, at the end of the prophetic period of 2300 days, He entered the second and last phase of His atoning ministry. It is a work of investigative judgment which is part of the ultimate disposition of all sin, typified by the cleansing of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. In that typical service the sanctuary was cleansed with the blood of animal sacrifices, but the heavenly things are purified with the perfect sacrifice of the blood of Jesus. The investigative judgment reveals to heavenly intelligences who among the dead are asleep in Christ and therefore, in Him, are deemed worthy to have part in the first resurrection. It also makes manifest who among the living are abiding in Christ, keeping the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, and in Him, therefore, are ready for translation into His everlasting kingdom. This judgment vindicates the justice of God in saving those who believe in Jesus. It declares that those who have remained loyal to God shall receive the kingdom. The completion of this ministry of Christ will mark the close of human probation before the Second Advent. (Heb. 8:1-5; 4:14-16; 9:11-28; 10:19-22; 1:3; 2:16, 17; Dan. 7:9-27; 8:13, 14; 9:24-27; Num. 14:34; Eze. 4:6; Lev. 16; Rev. 14:6, 7; 20:12; 14:12; 22:12.)
The hour of the evening sacrifice arrives. The priest stands in the court of the Temple in Jerusalem ready to offer a lamb as sacrifice. As he raises the knife to kill the victim, the earth convulses. Terrified, he drops the knife and the lamb escapes. Over the din of the earthquake he hears a loud ripping noise as an unseen hand rends the veil of the Temple from top to bottom. What did the tearing of the veil really mean?
Across town, black clouds enshroud a cross. When Jesus, the Passover Lamb of God, calls out, "It is finished!" He dies for the sins of the world.
Type has met antitype. The very event the Temple services have pointed to through the centuries has taken place. The Saviour has completed His atoning sacrifice, and because symbol has met reality, the rituals foreshadowing this sacrifice have been superseded. Thus the rent veil, the dropped knife, the escaped lamb.
But there is more to salvation history. It reaches beyond the cross. Jesus' resurrection and ascension direct our attention to the heavenly sanctuary, where, no longer the Lamb, He ministers as priest. The once-for-all sacrifice has been offered (Heb. 9:28); now He makes available to all the benefits of this atoning sacrifice.
I have noted some of the saints here saying that the atonement was fulfilled on the cross. I wonder how this could be correct? We have many texts telling us that there is an ongoing Investigative Judgement happening in the heavenly courts at this very moment.
Replies are closed for this discussion.
According to us, the Sabbath doctrine has been preserved. And we do not teach that it is a salvation doctrine, but a doctrine that will be used in the end to mark/seal Gods people. I don't believe in the seal of God being the Sabbath, but we adopted this doctrine from the Seventh Day Baptist, it was never unique to us.
Thank you for your post.
12 Dear friends, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal that has come on you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. 13 But rejoice inasmuch as you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed. 14 If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you. 15 If you suffer, it should not be as a murderer or thief or any other kind of criminal, or even as a meddler. 16 However, if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name. 17 For it is time for judgment to begin with God’s household; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God? 18 And,
“If it is hard for the righteous to be saved,
what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?”[a]
19 So then, those who suffer according to God’s will should commit themselves to their faithful Creator and continue to do good
This is talking about judgement that comes to a sinner rather than the suffering that comes from being a Christian. "For it is time for judgement to begin with Gods household," notice the present and not future tense. Serving God and suffering on his behalf is our goal.
Taking, verses out of context allows us to cotinue in darkness, confirming what is not Gods intention.
H. Leon Bryan
"For it is time for judgment to begin with God’s household; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God? And,'If it is hard for the righteous to be saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?'"
The comparison with the difficulty of sinners to be saved through the same judgment (saying it only begins with the house of God, which suggests it will go to them too) makes it clear that this is talking about the judgment of God, not just suffering for doing right.
Clear to you Vicki because you believe in the IJ, but not clear to other Christians, and it is not clear in the text. It does not say, when we have been judged by Christ in the second ministry in heaven. You must read into the text to develop this conclusion. Again the tense of the judgment is present not future, indicating that we will be judged according to our actions if we pursue sin and not the Grace of Christ. Understanding that when we accept the Gift of Christ we are accepting his will rather than our own. We cannot pursue earthly desires and Christ at the same time. This is consistent throughout the bible, what is not is the concept of the IJ.
No, it is very clear and self-evident to a reader of any background without further explanation.
But to try to prove that 1 Peter 4:17-18 not talking about judgment of the righteous is the only time that you have to start doing a lot of complicated explanation.
I am not talking about Pharisees, I let you categorize other Christians as Pharisees. I am talking about other Christians who for 2000 years, did not mention or confirm this message. Additionally, I'm talking about other denominations who do not hold to this belief as it is unique only to SDA's. Additionally, you do not find an investigative judgment unless you are reading into the text. The Bible talks about judgment for the wicked, but does not talk about judgment for the Saints. We are not judge, because Christ life is placed in judgment, instead of ours.
We should throw out the Sabbath doctrine too if we are going by what other Christians confirm over the last 2,000 years.
"Narrow is the way and few there be who find it." We are not to go by what great men of earth think- but by the Bible itself. In referring to the Pharisee statement I am suggesting that it is doing the same thing that they did in days of old to reject truth on the basis that "important men" didn't see it.
"The Bible talks about judgment for the wicked, but does not talk about judgment for the Saints," you said. This statement can't be reconciled with the verse below;
“For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?” 1 Peter 4:17-18
The question has been answered- it is very clear if one is willing to see it. I must go now.
May God be with you.
Reading Dan. Tonite, I just got a completely different idea about what he is saying.
" I was appalled by the vision, it was beyond understanding."
He must have understood something about the vision to make him appalled, and sick.
It appalled him enough that he just couldn't understand it. Or you might say he just couldn't believe it.
Keith: "Reading Dan. Tonite, I just got a completely different idea about what he is saying. " I was appalled by the vision, it was beyond understanding." He must have understood something about the vision to make him appalled, and sick.
It appalled him enough that he just couldn't understand it. Or you might say he just couldn't believe it.
Nope Keith, the Bible says
Dan.8:26 The vision of the evenings and the mornings that has been told is true, but seal up the vision, for it refers to many days from now.”
27 And I, Daniel, was overcome and lay sick for some days. Then I rose and went about the king's business, but I was appalled by the vision and did not understand it.
Daniel said he did not understand the vision, but your now trying to make it say he did understand it, which is going against the what the Bible is saying.
Keith: "He must have understood something about the vision to make him appalled, and sick."
Bible: Dan.8:27 "...but I was appalled by the vision and did not understand it.
Keith says Daniel must have understood something of the evenings and mornings vision, and the Bible says he "did not understand it" in chapter 8.
Whom shall I believe Keith, you or the Bible?
Hi Leon I found this among your postings that you choose to scatter all over the place, the quote is out of a much longer post but to keep it simple I will address your fist point first.
If a person were to do an honest investigation of the belief, there is no way they would continue to hold to the because there are too many issues with the belief. First, and foremost it diminishes the sacrifice made it at the Cross
No it does not this is where you are going wrong Leon. The Sacrifice on the Cross is totally different to the Day of Atonement. I have posed these questions before for you Leon but so far you have refused to answer. But I will try once More.
The Daily sacrifice of the Lamb was Representing the Sacrifice on the Cross for forgiveness of sin do we Agree?
God instituted the Day of Atonement Just to keep it simple what does that represent to you?
I am sorry for my disorganization, and I'm fully figured out how the site works. No I do not agree that the sacrifice of the Cross is different in the Day of atonement. I believe both sacrifices pointed to Christ, as did Able's sacrifice, and no other sacrifices which are necessary to point to what Christ would do for us. God, it's due to both the Day of atonement, and the daily sacrifice to remind us individually and collectively of Christ's great sacrifice or us. To separate the two diminishes what Christ did for us.
Thanks Leon My name is Ian But it looks like you was addressing the answer to me. I must say if you can see no difference on the sacrificed Lamb and the two Goats I feel there is no point to take this any further.
All I can suggest is that you study the sanctuary a bit deeper.