Thursday: The Rich and the Poor
In this short letter, James shows great concern for poor people; some even consider it his major theme. But to modern ears, his diatribes against the rich and in favor of the poor seem extreme, even shocking. At the same time, however, James isn’t saying anything much different from what Jesus has said.
Image © Pacific Press from GoodSalt.com
Compare James 1:9-11 with Luke 8:14; compare James 1:27 with Matthew 25:37-40; compare James 2:15-16 with Luke 10:29-37; and compare James 5:1-4 with Luke 12:16-21. What’s the common message there to us? What warnings and admonitions can we all take away from what’s so clearly expressed here?
James, of course, does not shut the doors of the kingdom on all rich people. But, like Jesus, he recognizes the insidious temptations that come with wealth. Rich or poor, we need to keep our eyes on the real prize. The problem with money is that it tends to deceive us into focusing on the temporal instead of the eternal (2 Cor. 4:18).
No question, the acquisition of wealth, higher education, or social influence tends to separate people from the less fortunate.
But the early church kept the two classes together by turning worldly values upside down. The one who takes the lowest place, the role of humility, is the one who can glory in exaltation.
As long as there are hungry ones in God’s world to be fed, naked ones to be clothed, souls perishing for the bread and water of salvation, every unnecessary indulgence, every overplus of capital, pleads for the poor and the naked.
-Ellen G. White, Welfare Ministry, p. 269.
What about yourself? Whether rich or poor, it doesn’t matter; what matters is how you relate to money. What is it about money that makes it so potentially dangerous to our souls?
(18)
"Rich" is a relative term, if I do no redefine it, I may miss the implications of the scriptures. According to established standards, we may be far, far from being rich; but obviously we have more or surplus when compared with others who are unfortunate. Therefore, I think if you are in the first category, you can consider yourself rich. Something to consider!!
Seemingly the divide was obvious between the rich and the poor in the early church. Hence, James skillfully addressed this issue. He encourages lowly Christians to adopt a non-materialistic worldview, their security is in God, they have joy and peace of mind, look beyond their lowly situations and feel exalted in their spirituality. Don't even wish that you have the rich man's luxuries. The reality of the ungodly rich man is, he will wither like grass in the scorching sun. But James also brings much hope to those who are rich (or "rich" ). He suggest that they embrace humility - don't seek false security from wealth, a well-paid job, high education, high social status ....... All of these will eventually fail.
I am also concerned about the false security that we exhibit in being the remnant, sabbath worshippers, and having the Spirit of Prophecy - rich and in need of nothing.
Was Jesus exaggerating when He said, “Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God," or did He mean it? (Matthew 19:24)
Without a firm basis and possibly to broaden the way (Matthew 7:13, 14) so as to provide a path for the rich it has been suggested that a camel may actually thread the needle Christ was referring to. Notwithstanding such a supposition the disciples’ response and Jesus’ own indirect confirmation makes it sufficiently clear he was talking about the impossible (Matthew 19:25).
Only by divine intervention which effects a real change is there hope (Matthew 19:26). To be rich in this world is not simply to come into possession of material/money, but to hoard possessions with no real purpose or with the intent primarily to gratify self later (Luke 12:16-21). Stewards who understand that all they have belongs to the Creator and manage same on behalf of the real owner are not rich in this world, but store up treasures in Heaven (Matthew 6:19-21)
Given the preceding why would anyone hoping to inherit eternal life desire riches? Why make the path to Glory more difficult than it already is?
One may ask who is more generous or faithful; someone who has $100 and gives away $20, or one who has $10 million and gives away $8 million? The world might cheer for the $10 million person, but it is not how much one gives away, or even the proportion given away, but how much is left which is the real measure of faithfulness.
Herein lies the problem – the more we have (by whatever means) or earn the more we feel entitled to indulge ourselves and splurge. So bring on the bigger this, and the better that, and have more fun, for our barns can support it, and it is well deserved.
The more of wealth, fame, social standing, power, secular education or other achievement we possess in this world the more self-sufficient we are likely to be, and the stronger the temptation to glorify self. Yet the more we are blessed the greater our responsibility to those around us. The EGW quote in today's lesson is especially telling.
Was Jesus actually saying that all of those who find the cross will not have claimed much in this world, at least eventually after God reached the heart?
I don't believe that having wealth is the problem. After all, Job, Abraham, Jacob and Joseph all had riches and were considered righteous. Instead, the problem lies in our hearts and how we relate to money (or wealth).
If our "treasure" is money (earthly riches) instead of Jesus (heavenly riches), then it will lead to our eternal ruin (Matthew 6:21). So wealth, like other things can (not must) become an idol that we worship instead of the Creator God.
I agree with you Sieg, the analogy of the Camel and the needle's eye is a story in humility. The rich man's wealth is not what will deter him from entering God's Kingdom, but his lack of humility, self worthiness and boastfulness.
Hugh,I do get your point and we really need to be careful not to get so attached to material things that we lose out on eternal life.Just a point of information.Jesus was not talking about sewing needle. Back in those days shepherds made the gate to the sheepfold extremely narrow so that the sheep had to go in one by one. That way he would get to count them. That gate was called a needle eye. It was narrow but a camel could go through it if he squeezed hard enough. Thus the rich man has hope. If it were the literal needle's eye it would have been useless for the rich to even try to gain eternal life. I hope rich folks are not demotivated by this text. Background knowledge is important.
Yes Yolande, and the camel(as I have been led to understand it) could only get through once relieved of it's burden and while stooping low. What a wonderful illustration.
Yolande and Robert,
What is the evidence, reference or source of this information or background knowledge?
Did the disciples misunderstand what Christ was saying?
What was Jesus saying was impossible in the context?
It has also been suggested that the camel was a reference to a rope, another way to create a possibility or path.
So which is it?
With or without verifiable information it is probably safe to work with context. Could the real question be what does it mean to be rich in the way Jesus used it on the particular occasion?
If sure maybe it is fine, but if in doubt one needs to be careful not to promote a theory which may give others a reason to justify larger and larger barns in the face of a solemn warning.
H'mm .. Hugh, I'm not Yolande or Robert, I don't see how the interpretation of "the eye of a/the needle" as a very narrow gate through which it was impossible to go unless relieved of all burdens could possibly "promote a theory which may give others a reason to justify larger and larger barns in the face of a solemn warning."
It's an old interpretation, but there is no real "proof" for it, to my knowledge. It makes sense to me, because it indicates that none can take their riches to heaven, and, as long as they cling to their riches, they won't get there.
Frankly, I don't think it's worth an argument.
Even though it probably isn't worth an argument I did find a very good, well documented article on the internet here. It seems to suggest that Hugh may be correct, however, Jesus did qualify what He said, "With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible" (Matt. 19:26 NKJV) and let's face it without God salvation is impossible for anyone (Jn 15:5).
Tyler, it seems that the idea of threading a rope (of camel's hair) through a needle is an alternate interpretation. But no one is quite sure of what the people heard Jesus say. The only thing that is clear is that it is impossible for "rich men" AS "rich men" to make it into heaven. They can enter heaven only in the same way any poor person can - by relying fully on the mercy of God and the righteousness of Jesus Christ.
I have always thought that the explanations which showed it was possible for the camel to go through the eye of needle were valid. However I don't believe that anymore. I think Jesus was saying it is impossible for a rich man to buy his way into heaven, just because he is rich which according to their way of thinking he had been blessed by God it didn't mean he could automatically be saved. Mainly no one is saved because of what they have, only because of who they have accepted as their Saviour.
Tyler,
Thanks. Although it is safe to generalize it seems Jesus was also saying something else by referring specifically to the rich. The question of self-denial in the Christian walk was something the Savior emphasized (Luke 9:23). Was self-denial required of the rich as of others? When the rich begin to practice self-denial what does that look like in terms of the management of resources?
To an extent being rich is relative, and is not simply coming into possession of money, but involves the recognition of our role as a steward of God's property. Diverse interpretations can cause us to see this or miss it or treat it lightly.
Whatever our understanding of this illustration and no matter how broad our speculations, the truth will be taught to all who are listening to the whispering of the Holy Spirit who will lead us into all truth. The lesson will not be lost on those who are searching with all their heart.
It seems Jesus was showing the impossibility of any other mode of salvation apart from "grace through faith", and the attending fruit of genuine faith. All other methods of being saved are deceptions of the enemy. That is why Jesus pointed out; "the deceitfulness of riches".
Hugh, you ask if the disciples misunderstood this lesson. It seems evident that they were confused on many of Jesus' teachings(according to their many reactions), but at last all was open to their understanding when faith followed conviction and the Holy Spirit was received.
Also, didn't Jesus soundly eliminate the "larger barns" loop-hole?
Yolande, when discussing this quote by Jesus it seems incumbent to read the answer to the question by the disciples. "Who then can be saved"? "With God all things are possible". Matt 19:25,26. I have heard a number of possible explanations to do with narrow passage ways of different types. They are from mans inadequate creative abilities. The disciples question doesn't leave much room for speculation as to their understanding of what Jesus said.
Who are rich?
Luk 3:11 And he answered and said unto them, He that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and he that hath food, let him do likewise.
According to John the Baptist, if you have two coats!
Is having a 'surplus' mean you are rich?
Are you not rich if you live from pay cheque to pay cheque, or if you live 'hand to mouth'?
Certainly if we have more than we need, we are rich. I agree it is not so much what you have that is the problem but having a self sufficient attitude, to physical as well as spiritual needs that leads to ignoring or rejecting our Saviour.
What is it about money that makes it so potentially dangerous to our souls? I believe the danger lies in the tendency to use money as a substitute in place of God to meet our needs. James 1:17 says "Every good and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of Lights, with whom is no variables, neither shadow of turning." I believe this verse applies to my attitude toward money as well. God makes provisions through money to take care of my daily needs but he is my Provider, not the money. I worship Him; not the money.
Years ago we used to go ingathering in the weeks before Christmas, making our appeal for those who wished to give for a worthy cause which included helping the needy(poor). I discovered that the more humble the home, the more generous the heart. The large homes, often lavishly decorated for the holidays were the most likely to give little or nothing compared to the poorer families of the same community. What does this tell us? Riches are deceitful! If our sense of need is banished, we will be less likely to see the needs of others.
If you have the ability to give aid to anyone with less than you, they see you as rich. But even more interesting is the fact that those who are possessed by the love of God and are yoked together (same mind) with Jesus, will have a self-sacrificing view of their neighbor. They might even see a wealthly neighbor as truly needy and poor "in spirit".
Don't we have a "rich" inheritance promised us? Isn't this a real inheritance? Are we not given the commission to make sure others know that it is available? Doesn't this make the solemn warnings (why did they use the word "diatribes"* in the quarterly?!)also written for OUR admonition?
(*James was not writing bitter rants against the rich, but giving solemn warnings of inescapable judgments of God against the ungodly. We must see the difference if we are to be effective in our witnessing.)
Ah, Robert, you bring my mind back to the Ingathering days. It's too bad we don't do that any more, because we used to meet a lot of interesting people, and many people found out about Seventh-day Adventists who would never have heard of us otherwise.
I remember the same pattern you do: We generally received many more donations in a poor neighborhood than in a rich neighborhood. But there were exceptions. We met kind and generous people even among the rich. I think it demonstrates that material wealth has the power to harden hearts, but it still possible for the rich to be servants of God, just like Abraham, who was rich in this world's good in the context of his society. (He would have been known as a desert chief.)
I think we need to keep in mind that, "the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil" (1 Tim. 6:10 NKJV). Money itself is not intrinsically evil; it is the love of it that is. It is when wealth becomes a person's god that controls his/her life; that is when the whole thing becomes evil. As others will no doubt point out many in the Bible were extremely rich but it wasn't a problem to them. Jesus never mentioned the problem to Nicodemus who according to some historians was one of the richest people in Jerusalem but when it came to the rich young ruler Jesus asked him to give it all up because it was controlling his life - it had become his god.
One other thing, I have read that wealth seems to be a way for people to have power and that many seek it for that purpose. To them it really isn't about getting the next luxury toy but about controlling other people. To others it all about pride and probably is used to compensate for a felt lack of something in their lives. So it's not always about selfishness with the worlds goods but may concern other issues instead where it becomes a controlling god in other ways.
Tyler, it is true that wealth buys power. That is the end product. If you have enough wealth you can sustain and increase both. Solomon comes to mind and always leaves me with questions. There was no one more wealthy during that period. He had way more of everything. He ended up discontented and sought women that he was instructed to avoid. I think because he had too much. Plus he deserted his God in the process. Everything is relative. Compared to many in the world that are starving to death, we are wealthy beyond belief. I also went ingathering but earlier than many of you. During world war two in the summer time. The cans were decorated with pictures of war and the canvas was for people in war torn countries.
It wasn't what Solomon had that made him sin, it was what he WANTED beyond all that. Coveting grows from a small "mustard seed" just as faith does. If our faith is not growing, then coveting is. The sin of coveting is that we fail to see our neighbor's need while focused on our own "need" and are so busy protecting it. It proves also that we have no true love for God.
Part 2 of this cycle is that amusements don't satisfy, so new amusements are sought and if wealthy enough, will be found(purchased). How else would anyone gather more things beyond counting? It is a sad cycle of wanting/grasping that has no exit apart from grace through faith.
If the wisest of men can be a slave to coveting, how easy it is, even for those with little in the way of wealth. With the wealthy the hold seems more powerful since they can follow their desires more easily while others just hope to win the next lottery while coveting the possibilities, or maxing out their credit cards. Both are blinded to their neighbor's real needs, and love for God and our neighbor is choked out of our lives.
"No one can serve two masters. For you will hate one and love the other; you will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money."(Matthew 6:24)
"Then Elijah stood in front of them and said, "How much longer will you waver, hobbling between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow him! But if Baal is God, then follow him!" But the people were completely silent."(1 Kings 18:21)
"Christ has said that we shall have the poor always with us, and He unites His interest with that of His suffering people. The heart of our Redeemer sympathizes with the poorest and lowliest of His earthly children. He tells us that they are His representatives on earth. He has placed them among us to awaken in our hearts the love that He feels toward the suffering and oppressed. Pity and benevolence shown to them are accepted by Christ as if shown to Himself. An act of cruelty or neglect toward them is regarded as though done to Him." {PP 535.3} E.G. White
"If the law given by God for the benefit of the poor had continued to be carried out, how different would be the present condition of the world, morally, spiritually, and temporally! Selfishness and self-importance would not be manifested as now, but each would cherish a kind regard for the happiness and welfare of others; and such widespread destitution as is now seen in many lands would not exist."{PP 536.1}E.G.White
"The principles which God has enjoined, would prevent the terrible evils that in all ages have resulted from the oppression of the rich toward the poor and the suspicion and hatred of the poor toward the rich. While they might hinder the amassing of great wealth and the indulgence of unbounded luxury, they would prevent the consequent ignorance and degradation of tens of thousands whose ill-paid servitude is required to build up these colossal fortunes. They would bring a peaceful solution of those problems that now threaten to fill the world with anarchy and bloodshed."{PP 536.2}E.G.White
I believe the most insidious thing about money is the way we as humans can use it to insulate ourselves from spiritual truths. It can cloak our spiritual condition making us believe we are independent thinkers and able to control our eternal destinies when in actuality we're blind, ragged and naked before God. What's worse is we may think because humans are impressed with our smell, dress, education, job, worth and deportment, that all heaven should be too.
We can easily be drawn to forget that we have choices to make, but salvation and righteousness are given to us as we are 'dependent' upon God. Independence from Him leads us to death.
Nothing wrong by being rich but richies must not define who you are,we have to be grounded in Christ and we should always remember that we are stewards that means nothing belongs to us but everything belongs to Christ,that is the reason we are born with no material things and when we exit we do not take anything with us.We should use what we have to glorify Christ and guard ourselves from falling in the same trap Solomon fell in,loving the gifts more than the Giver and making the gifts our downfall.Nothing should separate us from Christ.Christ is the source of richies but he always depended on the Father,we should have that same Spirit as is in Christ.
Money takes on the character of the owner.
A generous person may use money to help the needy. To a power greedy person, money will be used to propel their greed for power and controlling people.
Hence the love for money is the root of all evil since "love for money" is the character of the person. Money in the hands of a "wrong character" can be used for evil intentions.
Blessed are those who know that if they are rich, they are so because God has entrusted them to be stewards of his riches for we all came out of our mother's womb with nothing. Everything we have belongs to God. While God is not against us enjoying the resources he gave us, we should not forget the poor and the needy for it honours Him when we minister one unto another.
Money is one of the biggest blessing God gave to us, yet also one of the biggest TEST. A faithful person is one who remains faithful even after they have acquired money to influence people. Some are only good Christians because they do not have money to finance their evil desires. One may remain faithful to their spouse simply because they can not afford the expenses of a mistress but given the money and resources, their true characters show.
My opinion is to surrender our money to God, first by tithing and offering to acknowledge the superiority of God over our money. Then we use the rest of the money, conscious of the fact that He made us stewards of all that is remaining.
To glory in the lowest place sounds a lot like being proud of being humble. Where does this lead?
To glory in Christ is safe when God truly gets the glory. Whether we are rich or poor we can be lowly servants as was Jesus.
Admittedly some of us are probably uncomfortable being told about the management of our resources. It almost seems intrusive. Yet Jesus (the Creator) has a way of taking us out of our comfort zone.
Are Jesus’ multiple statements on the matter of riches consistent with the following account of a vision in The Review and Herald, November 26, 1857?
'I was pointed to these words, “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” Said Jesus, “with men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Said the angel. “Will God permit the rich men to keep their riches, and yet they enter into the kingdom of God?” Said another angel, “No, never.”'
It is good to read the entire account. Interestingly it starts out, "At Monterey, October 8th, 1857, I was shown in vision that the condition of many Sabbath keepers was like the young man who came to Jesus to know what he should do to inherit eternal life..."
Hugh, I think most people have at least some sense concerning the deceitfulness of riches.
What I would like to know is how to fit the application of the Review and Herald article into the last six verses of the book of Job. Better yet would be to understand the situation that Ellen White was addressing. Was she referring to people with average size houses? Was she saying that we all should live in shacks and dress like bums? What do you think?
Tyler,
Thanks for your usual penetrating questions which challenge us to think and not just talk.
Firstly on Job the Lord did not materially bless Job simply for him to enjoy abundance. God was using an unusual set of events to make a statement to the universe and to the human race. Job was expected to manage the resources which were still God’s, according to God’s leading.
Secondly the EGW vision actually speaks for itself and the complete article in the Review and Herald, November 26, 1857, gives context which each may assess and decide if and how it applies. There is actually a line which mentions housing. A shack or nice town home is really the Spirit’s call to make.
That said it might be useful to take note of the approach (in relation to riches) of the leader of the world’s largest Christian organization in giving up certain customary benefits and advantages and goodies to identify with the poor and share with them. This commendable picture looks a lot more like the pattern of Jesus (The Real Model) than the imperfect examples of the well-meaning Job, Abraham, et al.
It is important to take a closer look at the circumstances of those who were considered wealthy in scripture, what God was doing and how He worked with them. More than that we may review the primitive godliness of the Holy Ghost filled New Testament believers who had all things common (Acts 4:32). So saints like Nicodemus no longer saw his wealth as his own. Our global church is currently praying for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
Ultimately the main point concerning riches is recognizing we are not owners, but trustees (trusted servants/slaves of the Master), even if material is temporarily held in our name.
Can we ignore the question of surplus in the face of suffering and starvation as EGW intimated? How much can we trust ourselves? Apparently God wants us to experience some discomfort with surplus so we will think more about the welfare of others in need and thereby tend towards selflessness, which amounts to Christlikeness. This seems to be the point of self-denial (Luke 9:23), not in words only, but in practice also.
We may not be able to easily gauge the right balance, but we may at least turn in the right direction. This the Holy Spirit will certainly work with.
This response may be inadequate, but thanks again.
Hugh, is it God's goal to make us uncomfortable about surplus, or is His goal to help us see the sinfulness of sin, repent and believe the Gospel, which will result in love for God and for our fellow man? Guilt does not make us better people, unless it leads to the transformation that comes by faith once we see our need for the renewing of our mind, which will restore in us "the joy of salvation". Once God has us, He regains possession of His goods given to bless us by being a blessing to others.
I believe that true joy and victory over the world comes when engaged in doing the work of God for our fellow man by loving our neighbor as our self. Agape is an action. "For God so loved the world that He gave..."
In "The Two Crowns," Mrs. White makes an illuminating distinction between the earthly crown and heavenly crown. I would encourage those interested to read this and consider how it applies personally. It really opened my eyes.
CET, page 161
Jesus works to bring us perfect peace, which we cannot find in the world or it's riches. Our "comfort zone" is only bothered if we are given into being selfish with the gifts of God. The Holy Spirit's office is to convict the world of "sin and righteousness and of judgment", so none are left without understanding their obligations to God and their neighbor. So Jesus is wanting to relieve us of our guilt and burden of sin and provide comfort and hope.
I believe the article from the Review is speaking of those who do not acknowledge God with their blessings. God blesses some so that they can help others in His stead, and thus develop a character fit for heaven. The church is not meant to be without resources, and holding back from the work of God is not Christlike and cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven.
The question I must ask myself is what do I do with what remains once my real needs are met? Who am I serving with my wealth?
I know this is off the subject of poor or rich, but did anyone notice the memory verse in Heb 12:2? "is set down at the right hand of the throne of God"? What's with that? I thought Christ didn't enter the sanctuary where God's throne is until 1844. On the rich thing, I think you can be rich and benevolent or one could be poor and stingy.
Carol, because the sanctuary is off topic I will only say yes indeed, Heb 12:2 does raise a very interesting question and that I will comment on this under the article "The Sanctuary As a Model" by Joyce Griffith.
ALL further discussions on the sanctuary will be under the topic of "May you be sealed" article.
https://ssnet.org/?s=may+you+be+sealed&x=22&y=11.
If Sanctuary comments are submitted under the current topic, they will be promptly rejected.
Carol, the meaning of Hebrews is about Authority. Jesus told the disciples before leaving them that "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth." This is not about what ministry He is doing at that time, but His authority. 1844 began the "cleansing" of the "sanctuary", or judgement, which He is authorized to do on behalf of all who believe in Him.
The earthly sanctuary was modeled after the ministry of Christ, both on earth and in heaven, but does not portray the actual architecture of heavenly things. Symbols teach truths, but are not literal themselves. There is a "sanctuary" in heaven, but the angels are not embroidered, but real. The veil represents Jesus, etc.
God speaks in a language of types that we can relate too, but we can't make it fit perfectly with heavenly realities.
Robert, You said, "The earthly sanctuary. . .does not portray the ACTUAL ARCHITECTURE of heavenly things". hmm; but Ellen wrote in Early Writings page 42 the following: "I was shown that the door was opened in the most holy place in the heavenly sanctuary where the ark is in which are contained the 10 commandments. This door was not opened until the mediation of Jesus was finished in the holy place of the sanctuary in 1844. Then Jesus rose up and shut the door of the holy place and opened the door into the most holy and passed within the 2nd veil where He now stands by the ark". So we are saying that Ellen's vision as to what she saw, was not an architectural heavenly reality?
It appears to be a literal depiction on her part. I could have missed something. Carol C.
Carol, Ellen saw a "door", but what door was there in the earthly sanctuary? What does that door represent? I believe we need to take the Word as it reads and see it rich in symbols. Ellen's visions were often similar to those of Daniel and John, and she saw truths represented by things, such as chords which symbolized faith in more than one instance.
Is Jesus a shepherd? A door? Water? Bread? Does He have wine for blood? Are we really called to eat His flesh and drink His blood?
As for the heavenly sanctuary, does God sit on a wooden box covered with gold and carved angels that are set next to Him? Does all that John writes about in the Revelation depict actual things? Is there really any 7-headed beast...etc?
We are clear that the earthly sanctuary symbolizes or "shadows" heavenly things. (Shadow: adumbration, which means "faint representation of something") Now it may be that for the sake of other beings that there is actual furniture in the heavenly "sanctuary", however it is represented. I don't think it is covered with badger's skins or that incense is being burned. Our prayers of faith are a pleasant fragrance to our heavenly Father, and I don't see heaven filled with smoke.
No, I cannot describe what might actually be there, but I know what takes place and understand God's way in regards to sinners through the symbolism of the Sanctuary. (Ps 77:13)
Carol, many Christians prefer to avoid the subject or discussions of the Heavenly Sanctuary. Many times Metaphors and Symbolism are difficult to understand and apply, and so they avoid them. I would rather focus on other parts of the Bible that offer hope and promises with regard to our salvation. I will mention just one problem as I see it, and it has to do with where Jesus is and what he is doing. In Hebrews 1:3 it says After Jesus was resurrected, He went back to Heaven and sat down at the right hand of the Father. It says much the same thing in Hebrews 8:1. This is God the fathers throne that thousands will surround. I don't think that throne is inside the sanctuary. Verses 2-6 are what I see as symbols and metaphors. However the issue becomes 1844, which you mentioned. There have been countless hours and untold reams of paper over the controversy on this subject, from a number of sources. However it is understood, and by whomever, if it differs from mine, that is as acceptable.
Paul, I like your answer that you write, "I would rather focus on other parts of the Bible that offer hope and promises". Me too. That doesn't mean we should ignore those things that we may not understand. But, I do think that we try to make the gospel more complicated than it is. Since the original post I have been studying the Bible on Jesus work in heaven and where He went after his ascension. I found the following texts; Hebrews 1:3, Heb 8:1, Heb 6:19,Heb 10:12, Heb. 10:19,20 (Boldness to enter into the Holiest by the blood of Jesus), Ephesians 1:20, Romans 8:34, Mark 16:19, Colosians 3:1,1 Peter 3:22. I'm sure there are more, but from all these texts, it seems correct for me to assume that the "right hand of God" could be the same place as the Most Holy. otherwise, I would have to believe that the Most Holy stayed empty until 1844. If that is the case then the day/year prediction would be in error, because in the earthly sanctuary, the priests entered the Holy and Most Holy on the same day not 1800days/years later. This would not be an issue, accept our core belief is based on the sanctuary. This obviously, really bothers me. Carol
Carol, I don't think we can avoid difficult texts forever, neither do I think we should. Peter counsels us, "always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you" (1 Pet. 3:15 NKJV) and a lot of that hope involves our understanding of the sanctuary.
As a resource you can look into the Biblical Research Institute website for information on the subject. The site consists of a mountain of articles on various subjects and sometimes are very detailed and in some cases contain technical content which probably would suite your depth of study.
Carol, this is off the topic of the lesson, thus I suggest you find an appropriate sanctuary topic under which to continue the discussion.
Please consider this:
The book of Hebrews was not addressing the prophetic symbolism of the sanctuary services. Rather, it was addressing the contrast between the symbolic service and the actual work of Christ in he heavenly sanctuary. Indeed, Christ entered into the very presence of God when he returned to His heavenly home. And one way to understand the sanctuary is to see the Most Holy place as the dwelling place of God. And your suggestion that the Most Holy did not remain unoccupied for 1844 years makes perfect sense.
However, there is another aspect to the sanctuary services - and that is the prophetic aspect in which the ministry of Christ is pre-figured in a linear sequence. In the prophetic scenario, the court, the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place each represent part of His ministry in time. The court would represent His ministry on earth, the Holy Place would represent His ministry as Intercessor, and the Most Holy Place would represent the Day of Atonement or what we call the "investigative judgment."
For an informal discussion of the subject of the significance of the Day of Atonement, see "May You Be Sealed."
Just another reminder
ALL further discussions on the sanctuary will be under the topic of "May you be sealed" article.
https://ssnet.org/?s=may+you+be+sealed&x=22&y=11.
If Sanctuary comments are submitted under the current topic, they will be promptly rejected.