you need to hold distance from the screen you show things on . if i copy and try to share there is always a shoulder or fingers or pc on the picture. but great videos and presantasions,
Hmm, there are so many things to discuss about this presentation. The thing that stood out the most was the way this question was worded: “In order for Jesus to BECOME a merciful and faithful High Priest and redeem us He had to be in every respect like unto who?” (Implied answer: Us). This implies that Jesus did not become our High Priest until after He became human, and if He had become a High Priest prior to becoming human and suffer being tempted, then He would not have been a merciful and faithful one. However, the Father declared to His Son, “You ARE a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek” (Ps. 110:4). He did not say, “You WILL BECOME a priest forever”, no, “You ARE a priest forever”, right there and then, at that very time. The priesthood on earth was a shadow of the PRESENT priesthood of Christ. Knowing that you are a Seventh-day Adventist, I will quote Ellen White who said: “The priesthood of Christ commenced as soon as man had sinned. He was made a priest after the order of Melchizedek.” (Ms43b, July 4, 1891, par. 5). To teach otherwise is to deter from the 1888 message given to His church. Notice what A.T. Jones said: “That priesthood in Jerusalem, in the sanctuary in the wilderness, represented a priesthood that was already in existence after the order of Melchizedek … Do you not see, then, that this whole system of services given to Israel was to teach them the presence of the Christ then and there for the present salvation of their souls and not for the salvation of their souls eighteen hundred years or two thousand years or four thousand years away? Surely, surely, it is so.” (A.T. Jones, General Conference Bulletin 1895, Sermon 25, p. 477, paras. 6,7) Jesus did not become a merciful and faithful High Priest “because” He suffered and was tempted in order to learn man's condition and needs, and now all of a sudden, He is able to sympathize with and help us. No, He suffered being tempted because sinful man finds it hard to believe that Christ has always been our Great High Priest unless He “proves” that He could truly perform a sinless life and overcome the sufferings that we go through; even though He had already overcome in such men as Enoch and Elijah. E.J. Waggoner explained: “It is quite commonly assumed that the Word was made flesh in the person of Jesus of Nazareth eighteen hundred years ago, in order that He might learn man's condition and needs, and thus be able to sympathize with and help them … When the children of Israel were in the wilderness, ‘in all their affliction He was afflicted.’ Isa. 63:9. The prophet could say of a truth, seven hundred years before Christ, ‘Surely He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows.’ Isa. 53:4. God was in Christ, NOT THAT HE MIGHT KNOW MEN, BUT IN ORDER THAT MAN MIGHT KNOW THAT HE DOES KNOW. In Jesus we learn how kind and sympathizing God has always been, and have an example of what He will do in any man who will fully yield to Him.” (E.J. Waggoner, Present Truth UK, December 19, 1895) Because of His sufferings and overcoming temptations, WE finally believe He is able to be our merciful and faithful High Priest.
This raises dozens of questions but I will only ask a couple 1) if the following verses don't mean what they say then how are we to understand them? Heb 2:17-18 "Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, THAT HE MIGHT BE a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. FOR IN THAT he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted." 2) Are you saying Jesus was tempted to sin prior to becoming a man? 3) I don't disagree that the priesthood began as soon as there was sin because a prophet is someone who speaks to the people for God but a priest is someone who speaks to God for the people so yes, the priesthood began at sin. But it sounds like you are saying the cleansing started at sin also? If so then what happened at 1844?
@@andrewwhitehurst5001 I think you totally misunderstood my comment. There's nothing wrong with the wording of Hebrews, it's HOW we understand them. As you admitted, Jesus became our high priest the moment sin began, but this doesn't mean He wasn't merciful and faithful until He became a human and suffered. He's always been merciful and faithful. He suffered "that He might become" a merciful and faithful high priest IN OUR MINDS who either had rejected Him as a priest, doubted Him, or didn't even realize He was a priest. His sufferings proved it to us. Everything He did on earth was to change OUR minds (our thinking towards Him and His Father), it was not to change anything about Himself and God. Sin changed us, not God. Not to go down another rabbit hole, but let me see if I can explain it this way by using another verse. Heb. 9:22 says "without the shedding of blood there is no remission." Although this is a true statement, it doesn't mean, in order for sin to go into remission, GOD needed to see blood. It was because man (in our faulty pagan thinking) needed to see blood. Jesus had to die (shed His blood) in order to change our thoughts towards God, not God's thoughts towards us. Some replace the word "remission" with "forgiveness" because they believe God needed blood (someone to pay!) before He could forgive. This is paganism straight out. The reality is, WE needed to see blood (someone to pay!) in order for us to finally believe God has forgiven us. Just as Jesus has always been our merciful and faithful high priest, God had already forgiven us FREELY since day one.
@@kevinj.mullins6995 first off you say "as you admitted Jesus became our high priest the moment sin began", the implication of "admitted" is that I grudgingly changed my mind or unfortunately had to agree but this isn't the case. I never disagreed with that just for clarification. There are different phases of the High Priestly ministry (as seen in the sanctuary service) and each phase MUST take place for salvation. It is not a role play (not saying you said it was a role play). At first reading what you said seems good but I believe it is fundamentally wrong. I believe what you are saying is contrary to the very heart of the gospel and diminishes God's abhorrence of sin. I also believe what you are saying goes against what the sanctuary teaches. Let me explain why I don't agree and with what in particular. You say "He suffered 'that He might become' a merciful and faithful high priest IN OUR MINDS". I disagree with you here. The verse doesn't say that nor can I see that implied in it in any way. It says He took the nature of a man. Why would He do that if all He was doing was simply for show (it is for nothing but show if He did it because "WE needed to see blood")? It goes on to say "wherefore" or for THAT reason, why did He take humanity? Because "it behooved Him", it was absolutely necessary for Him TO BE (not show) a merciful and faithful High Priest. vs 18 "FOR IN THAT he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted." In other words His temptations and overcoming resulted in Him being able to succour us. It says nothing about He was tempted for our show I do agree with you that sin changed us not God. God says the wages of sin is death. But again I disagree with you when you say "It was because man (in our faulty pagan thinking) needed to see blood. Jesus had to die (shed His blood) in order to change our thoughts towards God". I agree that our thoughts towards God needed to change and the cross is the central focus of that change but I don't agree that this was the main purpose of the cross because this is not what the scriptures tell us. When we sin we have the judgment of death placed upon us but because of probation time was given for our sins to be placed upon the Lamb. Now HE is guilty of my sin so now He MUST die. He doesn't have to die because we "need to see blood" but because that is the consequence to sin. This isn't because "someone needed to pay" but because it is a simple fact of God's character which abhors sin and is a consuming fire. Sin is so heinous that forgiveness cannot be granted to someone who is guilty of sin. So in order for a sinner to be forgiven the guilt of sin must be removed and placed upon another. THIS is the reason for the sacrifice and one of the positive consequences of that sacrifice is that we see the infinite love of God in loving us SO MUCH that He was willing to risk losing His Son so He could atone for our sins and be redeemed. You said "WE needed to see blood (someone to pay!) in order for us to finally believe God has forgiven us." Again, I don't agree. Luke 16:31 "And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." God (Moses and the prophets) has told us in 1 John 1:9 "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." If we don't have enough of a relationship with God to believe Him when He says He will forgive us then we won't believe Him when He said He gave His Son. Remember you and I didn't actually SEE "the blood" so we have to believe Him when He says it. If we can't believe Him that He will forgive then we won't believe Him that He gave His Son so "the blood" wouldn't matter. I believe what you are saying is fundamentally flawed because I hear you saying the sacrifice was just for show.
In Exo 13:21 in the KJV, the Lord is capitalized as LORD. So your version is the NKJV. Which is confusing because we know when LORD is capitalized, it means the Father.
Amen, Amen!! what a beautiful presentation.
Amen, only the Son of our Father in heaven could save the list sinner, no other 🙏🏼
Amen ❤
you need to hold distance from the screen you show things on . if i copy and try to share there is always a shoulder or fingers or pc on the picture.
but great videos and presantasions,
Hmm, there are so many things to discuss about this presentation. The thing that stood out the most was the way this question was worded:
“In order for Jesus to BECOME a merciful and faithful High Priest and redeem us He had to be in every respect like unto who?” (Implied answer: Us).
This implies that Jesus did not become our High Priest until after He became human, and if He had become a High Priest prior to becoming human and suffer being tempted, then He would not have been a merciful and faithful one.
However, the Father declared to His Son, “You ARE a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek” (Ps. 110:4). He did not say, “You WILL BECOME a priest forever”, no, “You ARE a priest forever”, right there and then, at that very time. The priesthood on earth was a shadow of the PRESENT priesthood of Christ. Knowing that you are a Seventh-day Adventist, I will quote Ellen White who said:
“The priesthood of Christ commenced as soon as man had sinned. He was made a priest after the order of Melchizedek.” (Ms43b, July 4, 1891, par. 5).
To teach otherwise is to deter from the 1888 message given to His church. Notice what A.T. Jones said:
“That priesthood in Jerusalem, in the sanctuary in the wilderness, represented a priesthood that was already in existence after the order of Melchizedek … Do you not see, then, that this whole system of services given to Israel was to teach them the presence of the Christ then and there for the present salvation of their souls and not for the salvation of their souls eighteen hundred years or two thousand years or four thousand years away? Surely, surely, it is so.” (A.T. Jones, General Conference Bulletin 1895, Sermon 25, p. 477, paras. 6,7)
Jesus did not become a merciful and faithful High Priest “because” He suffered and was tempted in order to learn man's condition and needs, and now all of a sudden, He is able to sympathize with and help us. No, He suffered being tempted because sinful man finds it hard to believe that Christ has always been our Great High Priest unless He “proves” that He could truly perform a sinless life and overcome the sufferings that we go through; even though He had already overcome in such men as Enoch and Elijah. E.J. Waggoner explained:
“It is quite commonly assumed that the Word was made flesh in the person of Jesus of Nazareth eighteen hundred years ago, in order that He might learn man's condition and needs, and thus be able to sympathize with and help them … When the children of Israel were in the wilderness, ‘in all their affliction He was afflicted.’ Isa. 63:9. The prophet could say of a truth, seven hundred years before Christ, ‘Surely He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows.’ Isa. 53:4. God was in Christ, NOT THAT HE MIGHT KNOW MEN, BUT IN ORDER THAT MAN MIGHT KNOW THAT HE DOES KNOW. In Jesus we learn how kind and sympathizing God has always been, and have an example of what He will do in any man who will fully yield to Him.” (E.J. Waggoner, Present Truth UK, December 19, 1895)
Because of His sufferings and overcoming temptations, WE finally believe He is able to be our merciful and faithful High Priest.
This raises dozens of questions but I will only ask a couple
1) if the following verses don't mean what they say then how are we to understand them? Heb 2:17-18 "Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, THAT HE MIGHT BE a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. FOR IN THAT he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted."
2) Are you saying Jesus was tempted to sin prior to becoming a man?
3) I don't disagree that the priesthood began as soon as there was sin because a prophet is someone who speaks to the people for God but a priest is someone who speaks to God for the people so yes, the priesthood began at sin. But it sounds like you are saying the cleansing started at sin also? If so then what happened at 1844?
@@andrewwhitehurst5001 I think you totally misunderstood my comment. There's nothing wrong with the wording of Hebrews, it's HOW we understand them. As you admitted, Jesus became our high priest the moment sin began, but this doesn't mean He wasn't merciful and faithful until He became a human and suffered. He's always been merciful and faithful. He suffered "that He might become" a merciful and faithful high priest IN OUR MINDS who either had rejected Him as a priest, doubted Him, or didn't even realize He was a priest. His sufferings proved it to us. Everything He did on earth was to change OUR minds (our thinking towards Him and His Father), it was not to change anything about Himself and God. Sin changed us, not God.
Not to go down another rabbit hole, but let me see if I can explain it this way by using another verse. Heb. 9:22 says "without the shedding of blood there is no remission." Although this is a true statement, it doesn't mean, in order for sin to go into remission, GOD needed to see blood. It was because man (in our faulty pagan thinking) needed to see blood. Jesus had to die (shed His blood) in order to change our thoughts towards God, not God's thoughts towards us.
Some replace the word "remission" with "forgiveness" because they believe God needed blood (someone to pay!) before He could forgive. This is paganism straight out. The reality is, WE needed to see blood (someone to pay!) in order for us to finally believe God has forgiven us. Just as Jesus has always been our merciful and faithful high priest, God had already forgiven us FREELY since day one.
@@kevinj.mullins6995 first off you say "as you admitted Jesus became our high priest the moment sin began", the implication of "admitted" is that I grudgingly changed my mind or unfortunately had to agree but this isn't the case. I never disagreed with that just for clarification. There are different phases of the High Priestly ministry (as seen in the sanctuary service) and each phase MUST take place for salvation. It is not a role play (not saying you said it was a role play).
At first reading what you said seems good but I believe it is fundamentally wrong. I believe what you are saying is contrary to the very heart of the gospel and diminishes God's abhorrence of sin. I also believe what you are saying goes against what the sanctuary teaches. Let me explain why I don't agree and with what in particular.
You say "He suffered 'that He might become' a merciful and faithful high priest IN OUR MINDS". I disagree with you here. The verse doesn't say that nor can I see that implied in it in any way. It says He took the nature of a man. Why would He do that if all He was doing was simply for show (it is for nothing but show if He did it because "WE needed to see blood")? It goes on to say "wherefore" or for THAT reason, why did He take humanity? Because "it behooved Him", it was absolutely necessary for Him TO BE (not show) a merciful and faithful High Priest. vs 18 "FOR IN THAT he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted." In other words His temptations and overcoming resulted in Him being able to succour us. It says nothing about He was tempted for our show
I do agree with you that sin changed us not God. God says the wages of sin is death. But again I disagree with you when you say "It was because man (in our faulty pagan thinking) needed to see blood. Jesus had to die (shed His blood) in order to change our thoughts towards God". I agree that our thoughts towards God needed to change and the cross is the central focus of that change but I don't agree that this was the main purpose of the cross because this is not what the scriptures tell us. When we sin we have the judgment of death placed upon us but because of probation time was given for our sins to be placed upon the Lamb. Now HE is guilty of my sin so now He MUST die. He doesn't have to die because we "need to see blood" but because that is the consequence to sin. This isn't because "someone needed to pay" but because it is a simple fact of God's character which abhors sin and is a consuming fire. Sin is so heinous that forgiveness cannot be granted to someone who is guilty of sin. So in order for a sinner to be forgiven the guilt of sin must be removed and placed upon another. THIS is the reason for the sacrifice and one of the positive consequences of that sacrifice is that we see the infinite love of God in loving us SO MUCH that He was willing to risk losing His Son so He could atone for our sins and be redeemed.
You said "WE needed to see blood (someone to pay!) in order for us to finally believe God has forgiven us." Again, I don't agree. Luke 16:31 "And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." God (Moses and the prophets) has told us in 1 John 1:9 "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." If we don't have enough of a relationship with God to believe Him when He says He will forgive us then we won't believe Him when He said He gave His Son. Remember you and I didn't actually SEE "the blood" so we have to believe Him when He says it. If we can't believe Him that He will forgive then we won't believe Him that He gave His Son so "the blood" wouldn't matter.
I believe what you are saying is fundamentally flawed because I hear you saying the sacrifice was just for show.
In Exo 13:21 in the KJV, the Lord is capitalized as LORD. So your version is the NKJV. Which is confusing because we know when LORD is capitalized, it means the Father.
In old hebrew there were no capital letters. Trinitarian translators screwed us
You are right, that was a typo. Thank you for catching that!
Amen 🙏🏽