Talk:Heavenly sanctuary

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Heavenly sanctuary is within the scope of WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Seventh-day Adventist Church and Seventh-day Adventist Church-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church To-do: edit  Expand "Glacier View Controversy" section, to include more background, history, theological issues, and details of the Glacier View meeting itself Add to "Adventist Responses to Criticisms" section, ideally with material from Adventist scholars etc.

[edit] Article creation

This article will use a lot of religious jargon. Please try to explain terms, and make the article easily accessible to say, a non-Christian. Here is a brief discussion formerly from Wikipedia:WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church about the requested creation of the article. Colin MacLaurin 07:46, 10 May 2007 (UTC):

• heavenly sanctuary. In it, refer to articles such as Tabernacle (Judaism), Holy of Holies and heaven or similar. Would this be an Adventist-only page? Or would it work as a Christian theology page? Obviously for the Adventist POV it will mention investigative judgment. -Colin MacLaurin

If done, this would almost certainly be an Adventist focussed article. I'm not aware of any other denomination which teaches that there is a literal heavenly sanctuary, with 2 sections, a veil, an ark of the covenant etc. Tonicthebrown 07:15, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm also starting to think it should be Adventist-specific. I thought of including other Christian views on heaven etc. and of course every Christian believes Christ is with God in heaven right now etc. Incidentally, according to my Avondale College lecturers, Adventist scholars today focus not on literal heavenly architecture but more on the meaning and "phases of ministry" etc., but I accept your point that much is probably uniquely Adventist. Colin MacLaurin 07:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've made a start... Tonicthebrown 07:50, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Man, I had a stub created and then I noticed that the link had turned blue... Tonic had created the article! This is the second time - I think it was Ansell who beat me to create Association of Adventist Forums after my computer crashed, losing my unsaved written article :-( GJ though Tonic :) Colin MacLaurin 10:24, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Content

Question: Is the "heavenly sanctuary" equivalent to "heaven" in Adventist understanding? Or do Adventists either not give an answer, or not agree on this? As I partially mentioned above, I understand that some changes in the church's understanding have happened, particularly since the Desmond Ford fiasco in 1980. While the investigative judgment in 1844 is still officially upheld, some details have changed. As I mentioned, there is less or no focus on heavenly architecture so to speak. Perhaps that in turn means that "heavenly sanctuary" is equivalent to "heaven", but I don't know. Someone please comment. A citation is needed, ultimately as this is an important point. Colin MacLaurin 10:21, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

There's a quote from a conversation Heppenstall had with someone which I think we should include. It was made around the time of Ford's expulsion. He or someone said that while everyone was making a fuss over the date, others changed the event and no one even noticed. Colin MacLaurin 11:51, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Another fact to look out for in the literature to find a citation: One expert told me that they don't believe we can narrow down the investigative judgement to the exact day of Oct 22, 1844. I suspect this is highly likely to citeable from any Adventist Society for Religious Studies (ASRS) members publications, and possibly but less likely from the Adventist Theological Society (ATS). If we can find a mainstream source, let's put that in. Colin MacLaurin 12:39, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Another point: I understand that the church actually accepted some of Des Ford's initial claims. However Ford himself moved on in his beliefs, and this was no longer compatible with the church. This asserts there were some changes around 1980. This should be cited. Colin MacLaurin 12:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Be careful....

Care needs to be taken not to leave editorial notes, helpful hints, and reminders of things that need to be done in the text of the article. Articles may not be finished, but they are not "draft" versions. Those notes should be listed on the talk page. It is also possible to leave instructions in the text without them being visible, just enclose them in <!--- your text here -->

This also applies to other SDA related articles. They need to be cleaned up. -- Fyslee/talk 10:46, 10 May 2007 (UTC)