Adventists affirm Mark 1:15 regarding Dan 9 and the 70 weeks prophecy and pre-advent Investigative Judgment of Dan 7

[BobRyan]

But of course the off-topic Dan 7 thread keeps coming up - so I posted this

BobRyan said:

And even today we argue "WE ARE seated with HIM in heavenly places"

Eph 2:
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,

Heb 4:15 For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin. 16 Therefore let us draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.


Heb 10:19 Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus, 20 by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh, 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith,

Apart from not knowing when our name comes up, so not being able to kneel

The idea that in Dan 7 the saints are kneeling in the courts of heaven during the Courtroom judgment where "judgment is passed in favor of the saints" -- is NOT AT ALL apparent to the unbiased objective reader and so your statement has nothing to do with the pre-advent Investigative judgment in Dan 7 -- even if you wanted to switch this thread over to that topic!

How is this even a little bit difficult?

 

[BobRyan]

That’s quite interesting. How did Ellen White come to adopt a doctrine so different ...?

Let's review once again - the OP

BobRyan said:

(In light of many of the recent all-ellen-white-all-the-time-threads) I thought it would be a refreshing switch to have a Bible topic we all have the background info to discuss.

So then lets note what the OP -- actually says.

Dan 9 has a 70 weeks (490 days... becomes day-for-year 490 years) timeline predicting the coming of Christ.
Then in Mark 1:15 Christ says that the prediction of the first part - the 483 years is fulfilled with the start of His ministry

Mark 1:

9 In those days Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. 10 And immediately coming up out of the water, He saw the heavens opening, and the Spirit, like a dove, descending upon Him; 11 and a voice came from the heavens: “You are My beloved Son; in You I am well pleased.”​

12 And immediately the Spirit *brought Him out into the wilderness. 13 And He was in the wilderness for forty days, being tempted by Satan; and He was with the wild animals, and the angels were serving Him.​

14 Now after John was taken into custody, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God, 15 and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”​

​

16 As He was going along the Sea of Galilee, He saw Simon and Andrew, the brother of Simon, casting a net in the sea; for they were fishermen. 17 And Jesus said to them, “Follow Me, and I will have you become fishers of people.” 18 Immediately they left their nets and followed Him.​

In Mark 1 we see the start of Jesus' ministry and it includes the message that the Dan 9 timeline predicting the exact year of Christ's first coming - had been fulfilled.

Dan 9:
24 “Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the wrongdoing, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for guilt, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy Place. 25 So you are to know and understand that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem, until Messiah the Prince, there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with streets and moat, even in times of distress. 26 Then after the sixty-two weeks, the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing

We find information about that decree referenced above in Dan 9 --- in Ezra 6,7 and in Ezra 9k

Ezra 6 tells us it is a 3-part decree with Cyrus, Darius and Artaxerxes all contributing to it.
14 And the elders of the Jews were successful in building through the prophecy of Haggai the prophet and Zechariah the son of Iddo. And they finished building following the command of the God of Israel and the decree of Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes king of Persia.

Ezra 7: 8-9 --- in 457 B.C.

8 And he ( Ezra the priest) came to Jerusalem in the fifth month, which was in the seventh year of the king.(Artaxerxes king of Persia) 9 For on the first day of the first month he began to go up from Babylon; and on the first of the fifth month he came to Jerusalem, because the good hand of his God was upon him. 10 For Ezra had firmly resolved to study the Law of the Lord and to practice it, and to teach His statutes and ordinances in Israel.​

11 Now this is the copy of the letter which King Artaxerxes gave to Ezra the priest, the scribe, learned in the words of the commandments of the Lord and His statutes to Israel: 12 “Artaxerxes, king of kings, to Ezra the priest,​

(vs 15-23 treasures, gifts, gold to be sent with Ezra)


Ezra's prayer

Ezra 9:9 For we are slaves; yet in our bondage our God has not abandoned us, but has extended favor to us in the sight of the kings of Persia, to give us reviving to erect the house of our God, to restore its ruins, and to give us a wall in Judah and Jerusalem​

======================

Dan 9 is given as an "explanation" to the vision of Dan 8... because among other things - Dan 8 has no start date and Dan 9 gives an exact start date.
Dan 9 is the only OT prophecy with a timeline pointing to the start date of the Messiah's ministry.

So then the 490 years of Dan 9 starts in 457 B.C.
And the 2300 years (day for year) in Dan 8 start in 457 B.C.

===========================

My title is - "Adventists affirm Mark 1:15 regarding Dan 9 and the 70 weeks prophecy and Investigative Judgment start in 1844"

But I can see that the Dan 7 "investigative judgment start in 1844" topic is too much for one thread so I am making it into its own thread.

So first we note - it does not make even one appeal to anything from Ellen White
Second it is only fair to note that Tall73 pulled you into that off-topic discussion so I am not blaming you.

Next we note that in that OP you probably find a number of things to differ with or to agree with - so there is a lot of opportunity for responses here ... either for or against something in the OP, or something else I posted on page 1.

 

[BobRyan]

Daniel 7:10 is an example of a dream of St. Daniel, which was subsequently interpreted by a figure we can assume to be an angel. Since the verse you cite is from the dream rather than the interpretation, it cannot by definition be interpreted literally.

Not true.

Nothing in the Bible says that an apocalytic vision has NOTHING in it that is literally true.

We know that judgment in heaven is literally true.
We know that myriads and myriads of beings in heaven around the throne of God is literally true.
We know that the timing that vision puts in for the court room event - is literally true.

We know that saints are literal beings
We know that God the Father is literal.
We know that the Son of Man - is literal

Also regarding Daniel 12:1, it can be positively asserted and indeed proven from John 1:1-18 that St. Michael the Archangel is a created angel

I think we can all agree that Dan 12 and Archangels etc are not in the title or the OP. Feel free to start that topic if you like.

 

[BobRyan]

I am sure if any heavenly onlookers had questions about the books they had plenty of time to inquire:

How nice then that Dan 7 shows them doing that very thing. Feel free to comment on the Dan 7 thread if you like.

Revelation 17:8 The beast that you saw was, and is not, and will ascend out of the bottomless pit

A good example of what is not the topic of this thread.

1Corinthians 4:5 Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness

Indeed the second coming event will rapture the saints Matt 24:29-31 and destroy all the unbelievers 2 Thess 1:5-8 -- but none of that is the topic of this thread. Maybe you meant to insert this into the Dan 7 thread regarding vs 27 of that chapter.

 

[BobRyan]

No the scriptures are not saying what you want them to.

When Jesus comes that is when the verdict will be given but as already shown through scripture it was determined beforehand. '

Good point - as we see in Dan 7

Which why there is a court because God is going to make a just decision prior to His coming that Judgment will be delivered at His Second Coming.

Daniel 7:9
“I watched till thrones were put in place,
And the Ancient of Days was seated;
His garment was white as snow,
And the hair of His head was like pure wool.
His throne was a fiery flame,
Its wheels a burning fire;
10 A fiery stream issued
And came forth from before Him.
A thousand thousands ministered to Him;
Ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him.
The court was seated,
And the books were opened.

Indeed that is a "books were opened" event in Dan 7

Rev 20: 11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books.

So then a "books opened" event deals with judging by what a person does - as Christ said in Matt 7 as well. And in 2 Cor 5:10

 

[BobRyan]

tall73 said:
Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word

But on this one point, above all, they shall be all the more refuted, not at our hands, but at those of the most wise Daniel, who marks both the actual date, and the divine sojourn of the Saviour, saying: “Seventy weeks are cut short upon thy people, and upon the holy city, for a full end to be made of sin, and for sins to be sealed up, and to blot out iniquities, and to make atonement for iniquities, and to bring everlasting righteousness, and to seal vision and prophet, and to anoint a Holy of Holies; and thou shalt know and understand from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem unto Christ the Prince” 3. Perhaps with regard to the other (prophecies) they may be able even to find excuses and to put off what is written to a future time. But what can they say to this, or can they face it at all?

The Patristic quotes you just supplied us with, from the likes of St. Irenaeus, St. Basil the Great, St. Augustine of Hippo, St. Jerome, Origen Adimantius, Eusebius of Caesarea, St. Justin Martyr, St. Hippolytus, and Tertullian, are excellent

I think we can all agree that discussion that relies on actual quotes for the topic.. has the most value.

 

[BobRyan]

I am going to quote a bit from my earlier post here at length so that it is clear what Bob is responding to:

tall73 said:

Now Bob, it is also pretty clear you have not addressed a number of plain quotes from the text posted again and again.

Actually the thing that is clear is that you take this no-ellen-white Bible topic and wrench it back to Ellen White time and time again.

You only addressed the first sentence clause of this, but ignored the rest.

Because you failed with the first part of it.

It is a reference to church members judging other church members as even our own quote shows

1Corinthians 4:5 Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.

As for the second part - the point has been made repeatedly that the saints are taken to heaven at the rapture and as 2 Thess 1:5-8 says - all unbelievers are destroyed. As much as that is not the topic - this point has been repeated for you many times though you keep insisting that we be reminded of it-- again and again.

AT the rapture saints are taken to heaven and there is a wide open door there for "commendation from God" from the point of the rapture and beyond.

This is not even a little bit difficult to see.

The Dan 7 judgment takes place before the appearing of Christ - as even you admitted.

Judgment is when the Lord comes

here again you are shooting yourself in the foot.

The commendation of the saints happens starting with the rapture and continuing as they are taken to heaven.
The Dan 7 judgment takes place before the appearing of Christ - as even you admitted.

 

[BobRyan]

Rev 20: 11 [/B]Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books.

Yes, this shows individual judgment--after the second coming.

It shows that the judgment where books are opened - involves judging individuals according to deeds -
So the Dan 7 instance that is pre-advent can't be dismissed/ignored the way you suggest as if such a thing is not possible
Even you admit as we see in Rev 20 that the judgment where "books of record are opened" involves the record of individuals

The details you are "skimming over"
1. Rev 20 happens after the rapture, after the coming of Christ in Rev 19 -- in fact 1000 YEARS after that. So it only involves the wicked
2. Dan 7 happens BEFORE the Advent of Christ according to vs 27 and WHiLE The wicked torment the righteous.

You are essentially stuck at that point. Which may explain why you keep "circling back"

 

[tall73]

Let's start by reading the OP

That’s quite interesting. How did Ellen White come to adopt a doctrine so different from that promoted by her husband? Also do Adventists officially regard James White or other Millerites besides Ellen G. White as being prophets?

I will post the answer to that in the Ellen White prophecies thread, and answer Bob in this thread when I get time.

The only reason to post Ellen White or James White here, in a Bible thread, where I have indeed discussed the Bible at length, despite Bob's claims, is that Bob occasionally gets amnesia as to what he believes, and has to be reminded. Since he never disagrees with Ellen White (by all means let me know if any recent statement is the exception Bob) and her statements are stated to speak with prophetic authority, I quote her to note the Adventist view.

But I do have some additional information to give you on a favorite topic of yours as well, related to Adventism, in that thread.

 

[BobRyan]

The only reason to post Ellen White or James White here, in a Bible thread, where I have indeed discussed the Bible at length, despite Bob's claims, is that Bob occasionally gets amnesia as to what he believes

That excuse does not fly - I post my positions on this board - specifically dealing with the OP and the subject.
Your need to keep pulling Ellen White into the Bible-only thread - can't be blamed on me.

I have stated repeatedly that this is NOT one of your Ellen-White threads.

, Since he never disagrees with Ellen White

If you want to argue that my positions contradict what you interpret Ellen White to say on one of your Ellen white threads - go ahead and do it. - just ping my screeen-name --

I am not about to take a Bible-only thread intended to put non-SDAs and SDAs on the same "Bible only" level-playing field and turn it into one of your 'My liberary of Ellen White quotes vs TAll73's quotes of Ellen White". Much as you might prefer that sort of thing outside of an SDA forum.

This is not an Ellen White thread.

 

[tall73]

I think I will find a way to accommodate you Bob.

But that may mean I will answer you elsewhere, so I can actually post what Adventists believe instead of only what you want people to know about.

But I will also address Scripture.

 

[BobRyan]

I think I will find a way to accommodate you Bob.

But that may mean I will answer you elsewhere, so I can actually post what Adventists believe instead of only what you want people to know about.

But I will also address Scripture.

I post what I believe.

I don't even know what your status is anymore when it comes to Seventh-day Adventists.

Any time you want to agree - or disagree with what I believe - you can do it by responding to something I actually post, that is on topic for whatever the thread is.

This is just not that hard. Particularly when we are talking about a topic and thread that I myself have started.

Liturgist and a few others are examples of people that have come here with a different POV than I have and have posted as much. So have you. So it is not like depriving you of your Ellen White quotes does not allow you to post an opposing POV to what I have stated here.

 

[The Liturgist]

Not true.

Nothing in the Bible says that an apocalytic vision has NOTHING in it that is literally true.

We know that judgment in heaven is literally true.
We know that myriads and myriads of beings in heaven around the throne of God is literally true.
We know that the timing that vision puts in for the court room event - is literally true.

We know that saints are literal beings
We know that God the Father is literal.
We know that the Son of Man - is literal

Yes, and we also know that St. Daniel was dreaming, and his dream was sufficiently abstract that, like the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar, that it required interpretation. This is what a literal reading of the text conveys. The only way around this is to adopt a non-literal reading of Daniel 7, which is fine with me as a proponent of a hybrid Alexandrian-Antiochene exegesis in which the Scriptures in general, and Old Testament texts in particular, have both an historical and a prophetic layer of meaning, but I was under the impression that Adventists had a theoretical preference for literal-historical hermeneutics.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:

Nothing in the Bible says that an apocalytic vision has NOTHING in it that is literally true.

We know that judgment in heaven is literally true.
We know that myriads and myriads of beings in heaven around the throne of God is literally true.
We know that the timing that vision puts in for the court room event - is literally true.

We know that saints are literal beings
We know that God the Father is literal.
We know that the Son of Man - is literal

Yes, and we also know that St. Daniel was dreaming, and his dream was sufficiently abstract that, like the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar, that it required interpretation.

1. Dan 9 IS part of the interpretation for Dan 8 as the text of Dan 9 specifically states. And that is the topic of this thread BTW.
2. Dan 7 and 8 deal with a vision .. Numbers 12:6-7 says that God communicates to prophets in dreams and visions. EVEN the interpretation in Dan 7:15-27 is still INSIDE the vision

God is an expert communicator - we can trust His Word.

I was under the impression that Adventists had a theoretical preference for literal-historical hermeneutics.

Adventists use the historical-grammatical method

Historical-grammatical method - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So we don't insist that there are no symbols in dreams or visions neither do we insist that nothing can be literal in them. Context and the wording in the text determine cases.

 

[The Liturgist]

BobRyan said:
Not true.

Nothing in the Bible says that an apocalytic vision has NOTHING in it that is literally true.

We know that judgment in heaven is literally true.
We know that myriads and myriads of beings in heaven around the throne of God is literally true.
We know that the timing that vision puts in for the court room event - is literally true.

We know that saints are literal beings
We know that God the Father is literal.
We know that the Son of Man - is literal

1. Dan 9 IS part of the interpretation for Dan 8 as the text of Dan 9 specifically states. And that is the topic of this thread BTW.
2. Dan 7 and 8 deal with a vision .. Numbers 12:6-7 says that God communicates to prophets in dreams and visions. EVEN the interpretation in Dan 7:15-27 is still INSIDE the vision

God is an expert communicator - we can trust His Word.


Adventists use the historical-grammatical method

Historical-grammatical method - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So we don't insist that there are no symbols in dreams or visions neither do we insist that nothing can be literal in them. Context and the wording in the text determine cases.

And because these dreams and visions require interpretation, the text of them cannot be interpreted literally. Regarding your other assertions, we do not know that the timing the vision ”puts in” (sic” for the court room event is literally true, indeed, we have no information to confirm or deny that at all, and concerning the judgement in heaven, we have substantial reason to believe that to not be true, since Heaven is described as a predominantly spiritual realm, although one with some physical beings present therein, for example, St. Elijah, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and the risen Christ, and the Last Judgement is depicted as immediately following the General Resurrection, with the Elect entering the World to Come and the damned being consigned to the Lake of Fire. And most Christians believe that Christ returns to the Earth from Heaven to make this judgement. So many things you claim we know, we actually don’t know; we have opinions on them, to be sure, but we do not know by any means, and in several cases we have strong reasons to doubt.

This takes us to a major epistemological concern I have with your two posts, which repeat their text (for some reason, whether accidentally or intentionally, you tend to include the text of previous replies in subsequent replies, and I wish you would not do this as it makes your posts harder to reply to). The epistemological concern is as follows:

It is important that Christians not use the word “know” in reference to divine things the exact nature of which can be known only to God, and of which we have been given only a limited scriptural revelation, and regarding some properties concerning them, namely, the time at which the Eschaton occurs, we are warned about people claiming to know when this is. So the reality is we don’t really know anything about the Eschaton, but rather we have an idea about what happens based on Scriptural revelation, that we will be judged by Christ Pantocrator, and a faith in God that he will save us through His superabundant grace (a grace the Orthodox believe is uncreated), if we pay attention to his teachings and strive to follow His commandments, which given by God in His incarnation are, that we love God with all our heart, mind and soul, and love our neighbor as ourselves, upon these two commands resting the entirety of the Law and the Prophets, according to the spoken words of the Word of God incarnate.

 

[BobRyan]

And because these dreams and visions require interpretation, the text of them cannot be interpreted literally.

Depends on what the text's own interpretation says about it as we see in Dan 7 where even the interpretation is part of the vision itself. (Though this is not the Dan 7 thread)

Regarding your other assertions, we do not know that the timing the vision ”puts in” (sic” for the court room event is literally true, indeed, we have no information to confirm or deny that at all,

until we pay attention to the actual details in the chapter.

there we find that the court room event takes place after the rising of the 4th empire, and its 11th horn.
It takes place after the 11th horn has eliminated 3 of the initial 10 horns.
It takes place while the 11th horn persecutes the saints
It takes place before the vs 27 appearing of Christ.

I may be missing a few other details.

Paying attention to details is the way to find answers about the details.

and concerning the judgement in heaven, we have substantial reason to believe that to not be true

false.

The text gives us no grounds to imagine that while the wicked torment the saints on Earth - God is on earth , His throne on Earth, His court room on Earth, Myriads and myriads sitting down with open books seeking to 'pass judgment in favor of the saints' -- all the while allowing the wicked to torment the saints.

None of the beings in that heavenly courtroom are infinite God - except God Himself, the Father and the Son (called the Son of Man) in this chapter.

, since Heaven is described as a predominantly spiritual realm, although one with some physical beings present therein, for example, St. Elijah, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and the risen Christ,

So then again - even you admit to the limitations of physical locality. Nothing in the wording of the text tells us that Daniel intended his readers to NOT view this as an actual courtroom of God --
1. "the court sat"
2. The throne of God was there
3. The books were opened

These are all physical descriptions and his readers had no reason to doubt that part of it.

and the Last Judgement is depicted as immediately following the General Resurrection

Not in Dan 7.

If you are going to talk about the meaning in Dan 7 - you can't do it accurately while ignoring every detail in it.
You have free will of course and can ignore whatever you wish - I am just saying that to make a compelling case you have to use the facts in the texts that are the subject of the discussion.

You can add to it - other facts in other texts and still be compelling but not if you position them as contradictions.

 

[The Liturgist]

there we find that the court room event takes place after the rising of the 4th empire, and its 11th horn.
It takes place after the 11th horn has eliminated 3 of the initial 10 horns.
It takes place while the 11th horn persecutes the saints
It takes place before the vs 27 appearing of Christ.

I just don’t see what text you are talking about. Why don’t you describe what you think each verse of Daniel 9 means, and why it means that, (and Daniel 7) and how that relates to Mark 1:15, and then perhaps I can see what your actual interpretation is? Because right now, forgive me, but I just am not understanding or seeing half of your hermeneutic equation, in that I don’t get why you think these verses mean what you say they mean, or even in some cases what you think they say, to the extent that I am seriously baffled. And this is not usually the case in our discussions, for example, I know exactly what you think Mark 7:13 means and even have some sense of the why, since we have debated it extensively, and while I disagree with you I am not completely lost or confused by the argument, which I am in this particular case.

By the way, if you were to compose an SDA Study Bible with footnotes explaining the SDA interpretation of every verse, I would buy it. Or if there already is such a Study Bible, I will look for it on Scribd, if you are aware of one. Since one thing is clear: Adventist theology is rich, complex, and genuinely interesting, even if I don’t agree with it. It reminds me of Quaker theology, which I greatly admire even if I entirely reject the anti-sacramental, anti-clerical basis of most yearly meetings (analogous to branches or sub-denominations or sects) of the Religious Society of Friends.

 

[BobRyan]

I just don’t see what text you are talking about.

ok -- try this --

(Though this is not the Dan 7 thread)
I will top for a second to note some of the details in Dan 7.

there we find that
1. the court room event takes place after the rising of the 4th empire, and its 11th horn. (vs 7-10)
It takes place after the 11th horn has eliminated 3 of the initial 10 horns. vs 8
It takes place while the 11th horn persecutes the saints vs 20-26
It takes place before the vs 27 appearing of Christ. vs 25-27

Paying attention to details is the way to find answers about the details.

Why don’t you describe what you think each verse of Daniel 9 means

done

, and why it means that, (and Daniel 7) and how that relates to Mark 1:15

This thread is on Mark 1:15 and Dan 9.,.. this is not the Dan 7 thread.

That is why I keep trying to point those interested in Dan 7 TO the thread that is on Dan 7

Adventists affirm Dan 7 pre-advent Investigative judgment (and then Dan 8 and Dan 9 for it being started in 1844)

Dan 7 describes the pre-advent Investigative judgment - vs 9-10 Pre-Advent Investigative (review of books, records in heaven by "the court") -- vs 21-22 "Judgment passed in favor of the saints" -- so they are being evaluated/reviewed/discussed (as Rom 2:4-16 describes it)...

www.christianforums.com

Tall73 has seen me do that about a dozen times on this thread -- trying to get the Dan 7 discussion to happen on the Dan 7 thread.

I agree with your statement - the Mark 1:15 and Dan 9 topic is not the Dan 7 topic.

 

[tall73]

I just don’t see what text you are talking about. Why don’t you describe what you think each verse of Daniel 9 means, and why it means that, (and Daniel 7) and how that relates to Mark 1:15, and then perhaps I can see what your actual interpretation is? Because right now, forgive me, but I just am not understanding or seeing half of your hermeneutic equation, in that I don’t get why you think these verses mean what you say they mean, or even in some cases what you think they say, to the extent that I am seriously baffled. And this is not usually the case in our discussions, for example, I know exactly what you think Mark 7:13 means and even have some sense of the why, since we have debated it extensively, and while I disagree with you I am not completely lost or confused by the argument, which I am in this particular case.

By the way, if you were to compose an SDA Study Bible with footnotes explaining the SDA interpretation of every verse, I would buy it. Or if there already is such a Study Bible,

There is a full commentary set from the denomination, written in the 50's. You can get it in hard bound volumes, or if you have Logos software it is a paid add on.

I just saw that Archive.org seems to have it too, and may be free to access. However, I am not sure of the legalities, or if it is one you have to borrow, etc. I have a physical copy on hand, but it would be nice to be able to copy text, as I had to type it out before!

Here is a link to the Daniel volume.

Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary + Bible Students' Source Book : F.D. Nichol, Seventh-day Adventist Church : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

The Seventh-day Adventist Commentary Reference Series is a set of volumes produced primarily by Seventh-day Adventist scholars, and designed for both...

archive.org

However, a new commentary set was just started that you can read about here:

First New Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary Released in Nearly 70 Years | North American Division of Seventh-day Adventists

After nearly 70 years, a group of global scholars decided to revamp the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (originally published in 1953). The first full volume (volume 6) of the new commentary, called the Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (SDAIBC), was released this fall...

www.nadadventist.org

--
The new commentary series has been in the making for years. The first meeting of potential authors, editors, members of the Biblical Research Institute, and General Conference (GC) administrators took place in June 2012 in a kibbutz on the shores of the Sea of Galilee, Israel. The need for a new commentary grew out of the datedness of the SDABC (1950s) and the progress in linguistic, historical, and archaeological data since then.

 

[The Liturgist]

There is a full commentary set from the denomination, written in the 50's. You can get it in hard bound volumes, or if you have Logos software it is a paid add on.

I just saw that Archive.org seems to have it too, and may be free to access. However, I am not sure of the legalities, or if it is one you have to borrow, etc. I have a physical copy on hand, but it would be nice to be able to copy text, as I had to type it out before!

Here is a link to the Daniel volume.

Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary + Bible Students' Source Book : F.D. Nichol, Seventh-day Adventist Church : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

The Seventh-day Adventist Commentary Reference Series is a set of volumes produced primarily by Seventh-day Adventist scholars, and designed for both...

archive.org

However, a new commentary set was just started that you can read about here:

First New Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary Released in Nearly 70 Years | North American Division of Seventh-day Adventists

After nearly 70 years, a group of global scholars decided to revamp the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (originally published in 1953). The first full volume (volume 6) of the new commentary, called the Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (SDAIBC), was released this fall...

www.nadadventist.org

--
The new commentary series has been in the making for years. The first meeting of potential authors, editors, members of the Biblical Research Institute, and General Conference (GC) administrators took place in June 2012 in a kibbutz on the shores of the Sea of Galilee, Israel. The need for a new commentary grew out of the datedness of the SDABC (1950s) and the progress in linguistic, historical, and archaeological data since then.

The Archive version is free to download but absolutely massive compared to the notes in my KJV Study Bible, my Orthodox Study Bible and my Lutheran Study Bible, which in all three mainly consist of footnotes explaining doctrine on the three (the KJV Study Bible disappointingly does not reflect Anglican doctrine or contain the Apocrypha, which is a part of the KJV; indeed in place of the Apocrypha it has a paragraph in a set of notes on the inter-testemental period bashing the Deuterocanonical Books and claiming they are not inspired, a view I reject outright, the work rather reflects primarily Pre-Millenial Dispensationalist theology with many ideas taken from the Plymouth Brethren theologian John Nelson Darby, and the work is by a group of of Baptists, Calvinists and a token Methodist.