GOD'S LAW AND JUDGEMENT TIME - ARE YOU READY?

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Welcome back


No, he was not disfellowshipped in the 80's. However, his ministerial credentials were removed, and then later he resigned his membership I think a couple of decades later.

And no, I am not a follower of Desmond Ford. I didn't read For until long after I had come to my conclusions. And Ford actually has a very odd teaching called the telesmatic principle if I recall correctly, where he has two meanings to the text. So he still rejects certain Adventist teachings on the sanctuary and prophetic scheme, then brings them back a bit a different way. And I think that part of his teaching was a large part of what led to people not making much headway with the Glacierview meeting. Some of the people who were advising him, I think from the GC, but it has been a while since I read up on it, told him to leave that part out and just highlight some of the questions about the doctrine. But instead he made such a massive book for everyone to read, that few read it.

By the way, I did years later have a few exchanges with Ford. He is a sincere guy. And the first couple chapters of his book ask a lot of good questions.

Incidentally, he agreed in principle to debate Davidson or some of the Seminary folks, and was willing to do it here on CF, but they declined.

Totally wrong, but thanks. And about half of the pastors I talked to had issues on the subject as well. They just didn't leave. It doesn't take an ex-Adventist expert to find them.

No problem thanks for your clarification. It seemed from reading some of your posts that you had somethings in common with the teachings of Desmond Ford. That is why I asked. Thanks for the clarification. I will be out for a bit nice to see you again. I will pop back in when I can.

Bye for now :wave:
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yea not really, the problem was they went out from us because they were not of us and did not understand these scriptures.

That is your take. But consider that most of them did not want to leave. Many of them had served the denomination for years in leadership roles, and no one questioned that they were part of the movement.

For many of them they studied for quite some time before leaving, and in some cases they never left but still couldn't accept it all (Fletcher, Cottrell, etc.).

Ford certainly didn't want to leave. He still believes in Ellen White as far as I know, and wanted to explain his way of reconciling it all. I think when he did finally leave the denomination it was because he wanted to be ordained in the new ministry he started, so he joined some other fellowship if I recall.

Note what Andreasen said back in his day. And of course, Andreasen's credentials are so undoubted that t7c quoted his study on the subject a bunch of posts back.


Warning from M. L. Andreasen
The history of this movement shows that we have not always profited by heresies as we might. Ballenger headed a movement attacking the doctrine of the sanctuary. This occasioned a review of this question, but the study was mostly aimed at refuting charges leveled against us and did not involve the larger aspects and inspirations of our teaching. As soon as the immediate crisis was past, we did little or no further official study, though sharp differences and divergent views had been revealed that should have called for an exhaustive investigation of the subject.
When Conradi had his hearings, we were not much better off; and Fletcher was perplexed by the many different views he met among our men in Washington. True, we did some studying as we were faced with the necessity of meeting theissue; but again, as soon as the crisis was past, we felt our work done. To the best of my knowledge and belief, there has been no official or authorized study since then. We shall be unprepared when another crisis occurs.
I doubt that we fully appreciate how much these heresies have undermined the faith of the ministry in our doctrine of the sanctuary. If my experience as a teacher in the Seminary may be taken as a criterion, I would say that a large number of our ministers have serious doubt as to the correctness of the views we hold on certain phases of the sanctuary. They believe, in a general way, that we are correct, but they are as fully assured that Ballenger's views have never been fully met and that we cannot meet them. Not wishing to make the matter an issue, they simply decide that the question is not vital - and thus the whole subject of the sanctuary is relegated, in their minds at least, to the background. This is not a wholesome situation. If the subject is as vital as we have thought and taught it to be, it is notof secondary importance. Today, in the minds of a considerable part of the ministry, as far as my experience in the Seminary is concerned, it has little vital bearing, either in their lives or theology.
I dread to see the day when our enemies will make capital of our weakness. I dread still more to see the day when our ministry will begin to raise questions.

Well he was right, and the folks did start questioning. I posted Cottrell's survey of Adventist scholars back before they called the closed Committee on Questions in Daniel. Cottrell revised the Bible readings for the home. He was one of the primary contributors to the SDA Bible Commentary. He was an Adventists until he died. But still could not accept the IJ at the end, after years of trying to make it work.


During the Daniel Committee they were divided and never released the results. Then when Ford raised issues they held a hearing but largely based the decision on his treatment of Ellen White's material (despite the fact that he still accepts her on some level).

Now since then we have had DARCOM, and tons of dissertations on the subject, because they realized they had to answer all of these. And lay ministers also turned their hand to addressing issues. But the same problems keep coming up because of the texts, not because of Ford. I doubt most have read Ford's book. And I doubt most who have agree with Ford on a number of points.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Ok but just to be clear it is not talking about a daily ministration is it? It is the daily sacrifice connected to the Sanctuary that was taken away and the place of his Sanctuary was cast down.

Some read it as the continual, some the daily sacrifice, but yes, go with it as it reads, that is fine. Of course, some of the old folks said paganism! But I don't think most take that view any longer.

Indeed so here it is saying a number of things firstly as you have correctly pointed out in v13 the question is asked

How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?”

So let’s keep with the context here so we are highlighting what is being described;

* It is the little horn power that is described as coming up out of one of the four kings of the broken horns of Greece v8-9.
No, at least not in the Adventist interpretation. I am fine with you making it come out of Greece if you want, but you won't get to the Adventist view.

Read Hasel's DARCOM stuff for more detail, or a number of other more populists approaches. They take it as coming out of one of the four winds of heaven, otherwise it can't be Rome.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
* It is the little horn power that is described as waxing exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land. v9

* It is the little horn power that waxed great, even to the host of Heaven and the stars casting them to the ground and stamping or trampling them underfoot. v10

* It is the little horn power that has taken away the daily sacrifice and cast down the place of the Sanctuary v11

* It is the little horn power that was given a host against the daily sacrifice of the Sanctuary by reason of transgression and cast the truth to the ground and prospered doing so.

Now note the question that is being asked here.

DANIEL 8:13-14 [13], Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said to that certain saint which spoke, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? [14], And he said to me, To two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

So as you have correctly pointed out here we are talking about the restoration of the daily sacrifice and the restoration of the Heavenly Sanctuary from the little horn. The scriptures are talking about the restoration of the Heavenly Sanctuary services and the daily sacrifice for forgiveness of sins through faith in Christ. How long will God’s truth be cast down? 2300 days was the answer.

This prophecy is showing that the power of the Roman pagan/papal system to trample Christ’s sacrifice and the ministration of the Heavenly Sanctuary and God’s truth underfoot would be 2300 days (evenings and mornings).

What might be good to establish are the following questions from Daniel 7 and Daniel 8;

Who do you believe the little horn represents?
How does the little horn speak great things against the Most high?
How does the little horn cast down thrones and the host and stars of heaven?
How does the little horn trample and take away the daily sacrifice and Sanctuary?
How does the little horn magnify himself against the prince of the host?
How are the saints persecuted?
How did dose the little horn think to change times and laws?
How does the little horn cast down God’s truth?

Answering these question would help the conversation here.

I think historically there are only two options.

Antiochus--This is the one most protestants go with. However, I am not certain he meets all of the criteria as stated. So I don't necessarily favor this one.

Rome-- This is the Adventist view, and I think makes more sense of a number of the criteria. One weak spot I see is taking the antecedent to be winds rather than horns, but I suppose you can make some linguistic arguments for it. The south, east and pleasant land fit. Rome actually crucified the prince of the host if you take that as Jesus (the other view takes it to be the high priest). The Romans actually cast down the sanctuary, as opposed to merely defiling it, and of course it literally ended the daily sacrifices. Now as to papal, you could argue the other points of Adventist thought. Still weighing that one out. Rome makes more sense of a fierce king at the end of the Seleucid reign. Antiochus was more to the middle, and while he was fierce towards the Israelites, overall he was terribly successful. Tying the horn to mulitple kings of Rome is a bit odd, but it could represent a kingdom. That is a little out of character. So there are some pros and cons to either view.

In any interpretation including Rome you would have the day year principle applied. I think Shea's article on the subject is interesting, with a number of arguments. I do see some against it as well, but that is another topic.

I don't have any issue with the Adventist 70 weeks teaching at this time. It does not depend on the year day in any case as it is 70 sevens, analogous to the sabbatical years.

I am open to other views, but the starting kingdoms limit them incredibly.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Sorry tall, Daniel 8:14 is speaking about the restoration of the Sanctuary, the daily sacrifice and God’s truth that is being trodden underfoot by the little horn power.

Exactly! But I am not sure why you are sorry about it. That is what the text says.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It is speaking about the sins of God’s people as the truth of the heavenly Sanctuary is brought back and restored to its rightful understanding at the end of the 2300 days/year prophecy.

No, it does not in fact mention the sins of God's people in that connection. The "until when" is in regards to the trampling, etc.

This includes the understanding to God’s people on Christ’s work on their behalf in the heavenly Sanctuary and the great anti-typical day of atonement of which the earthly was pointing to.

You just left Daniel 8. Daniel 8 says where the problem was coming from--the little horn.

The defilement of an outside power is not the same as the corporate cleansing of all sin in the Day of Atonement.

Unto 2300 days then shall the Sanctuary be made right, restored or cleansed.
From the activity of the little horn.

The earthly Sanctuary is a copy of the Heavenly and this points to Christs work on our behalf and the cleansing of the Sanctuary from sin in the anti-typical day of atonement which is separate from the daily evening and morning sacrifices.
Jesus is the High Priest of the heavenly sanctuary, which is the true. We agree. But that is not referenced in Daniel 8.

Look at the question again:

13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?

How long will the activity of the little horn continue, the sanctuary and host being trodden under foot, the daily sacrifice being taken away, etc.

And the answer addresses the activity of the little horn (just as Daniel 7 is showing the judgment on the little horn and the deliverance of the saints).

14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed/restored.


Restored from what? From what the question asked, from the activity of the little horn.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Let's link the parallel scriptures from Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 which tell the story.

Origin of the little horn which comes out of the 4th beast

DANIEL 7:7-8 [7], After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and broke in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. [8], I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.

links to

DANIEL 8:9-12 [9], And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which grew exceedingly great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the glorious land. [10], And it grew great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground and stamped upon them. [11] Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. [12], And a host was given him to oppose the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it did this and prospered.

The little horn is judged and God's saints are determined and the Kingdom given to the Saints of God

Yes, they would be linked in this scenario. But you just added again to the text. The little horn is judged. We agree with that. But neither Daniel 7 or 8 hints at any judgment of the saints. They are portrayed as saints the whole time, and the little horn is portrayed as a destroying and persecuting power the whole time.

The restoration of the sanctuary is distinctly said to be from the activity of the little horn. But a defiled sanctuary is not the same as a properly functioning sanctuary service. Look at the text I referenced in the case of Hezekiah. The sanctuary was defiled by an outside source and had to be restored. That is what is happening here as well.

DANIEL 7:24-27 [24], And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. [25], And he shall speak great words against the most High and shall wear out the saints of the most High and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time. [26], But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it to the end. [27], And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.

Parallel event from Daniel 8

DANIEL 8:13-14 [13], Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint who spoke, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? [14], And he said unto me, For two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

links to Daniel 7:9-13 Judgement of the little horn and the people of God.
Daniel 7 nor 8 references a judgment on the people of God. The little horn is the focus in both.

And the restoration of the sanctuary is chapt. 8 is from the activity of the little horn.

DANIEL 7:9-10 [9], I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. [10], A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered to him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.

God’s saints are determined at the Judgement and found in the opened book of life.
No where in either chapter does it say this. And that is why minister after minister leaves the church. Not because they don't get it. Cottrell memorized all the Hebrew passages just so he could study it constantly wherever he was at to try and reconcile it. He couldn't. The scholars he wrote to couldn't. The Daniel committee couldn't. And the Glacierview basically removed Ford's credentials over Ellen White, not the scripture passages. I quoted the Glacier view statement document. They couldn't find the link either.

You can't say you go by the Bible and then read in what it doesn't say.

DANIEL 12:1 [1], And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which stands for the children of your people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time your people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

Surely you didn't miss the next verse did you?

12 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

This is not talking about the IJ. There is a resurrection going on!

REVELATION 3:5 He that overcomes, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

REVELATION 13:8 And all that dwell on the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

REVELATION 17:8 The beast that you saw was and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

REVELATION 21:27, And there shall in no wise enter into it anything that defiles, neither whatever works abomination, or makes a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

All very true. But Daniel 12 ties that to the time of the resurrection.

Just as we must give an account, appear before the judgment seat, confess, bow the knee, etc. That all happens before Him. We can't give an account when we don't even know when our name comes up in the IJ. And we confess! There is no confusion on the part of the onlooking universe, regarding our confession and bowing the knee.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Back to Daniel

DANIEL 8:13- 14 [13], Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint who spoke, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? [14], And he said unto me, For two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

So why the links between Daniel 7 and Daniel 8? Paying close attention to both sets of scriptures from Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 in relation to the little horn and God’s judgement you can see these are parallel scriptures and events described in a different way.

Both portray judgment on the little horn power.

The context in both events is the rising of the world empires leading to the successional rise of the little horn and what the little horn does followed by the judgement.

It is only after the rise of the little horn who;

* Speaks great things against the most high 7v8; 7v25
* Casts down thrones, hosts and the stars of heaven 7v9; 8v10
* Tramples on the daily sacrifice and the Sanctuary and God’s truth 8v11
* Magnifies himself even to the prince of the host 8v11
* Has power to persecutes the saints of the most high 7v21-25
* Thinks to change times and laws 7v25

that the question is asked, “How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot” 8v13 and the answer was given v14 “two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.”
Yes and the question was how long will the activity of the little horn continue.

This was parallel to Daniel 7:9-10 … ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened once again after the establishment and actions of the little horn described in Daniel 7:8-8 and Daniel 7:21-27.
Yes. The little horn is judged for its actions.

This is not talking about a cleansing of the temple from the defilement of the little horn as it is a reference to the Heavenly Sanctuary not the earthly Sanctuary.

You could have it referencing both. Adventists understand that both the earthly and the heavenly were impacted by Rome.

But either way, both judge the little horn. It is directly related to the restoration from its activity, because the judgement of the little horn ends its activity.


It is talking about the restoration of God’s truth of the daily sacrifice for sin and the restoration of the Heavenly Sanctuary and understanding of Christs ministration as our great high priest and the anti-typical day of atonement outlined in Leviticus.
Not pictured in the text.

Judgement is set 7v9-10 the Sanctuary restored, and sins cleansed from the Sanctuary in Heaven and every case decided for or against at the judgement for those written in the book of life. Those written in the book of life receive the everlasting kingdom which is given to the Saints v27.
Hope this is helpful

The kingdom is given to the saints. Nothing is said about a judgment on the saints in vs 27 or otherwise. You see books and say it must be an individual judgment on the saints. But it doesn't say that. The only thing judged are the little horn, and the other three nations who are allowed to live a little longer. Judgment is given in behalf of the saints against the power that was persecuting them.

And the saints are continually viewed corporately with no question of their identity.

If you want to see an individual judgment, Revelation 20 spells it out clearly. But no such description is given here. And certainly it could be, because it was in Rev. 20.

The reason Adventists approached Daniel 8 the way they did is because of the proofs of William Miller. He interpreted the sanctuary to be the earth and that it would be cleansed by fire in 1843, later 44, later Oct. 22 1844.

It was internally consistent (but wrong) to think that if Jesus came to cleanse the earth sanctuary by fire and destroy the little horn that it would restore things. But of course, he had misunderstood the passage.

Later Hiram Edson had his corn field revelation and identified the sanctuary as the heavenly sanctuary. So he had a new notion of what happened.

However, the context of the passage is still the activity of the little horn, not the Day of Atonement. He took the one word cleansed and ignored the context.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The sacrifices were indeed fulfilled in Chirst but not the cleansing of the Sanctuary for the sins of God's people. The earlthty day of atonement took please once a year to remove the sins of God's people that accumlated throughout the year.

This was to take place to remove all sin once and for all from the presence of God and why the sacrifice of Christ was required in the first place.

Scripture shows this is only completed prior to the second coming at the antitypical day of atonement of which the earlthy represented and points to.

I do not doubt that many aspects of the Day of Atonement will be fulfilled in their proper time in the type. However, the death, and entry into the sanctuary, and presentation in God's presence all happened in the first century. Those events will not be repeated. So those aspects of the Day of Atonement were fulfilled.

Moreover, note what it says about purification:

Hebrews 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high

By the time Jesus sat at the right hand of God He had already made purification for sins corporately.


Now in the type the high priest, would make a cleansing application of blood. There was no investigation by the High Priest in the temple. He didn't investigate any books. He made a presentation of blood for purification. That is the same thing Jesus did once. Then He sat down at the right hand of God.

Now outside the temple the people only benefited if they trusted in what the priest was doing, afflicted themselves, etc.

What we see is that right at the beginning of the Christian message Jesus fulfilled those parts of all the feasts--the blood work of sacrifice and presentation of blood--that related to purgation of sins. Then He did what the High Priest never could. Instead of leaving the sanctuary He sat down at the right hand of God, having completed that work.

We come to Him to receive the benefits of His sacrifice in real time for individual needs. But He has already made the full provision for sins.

16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

There are some things in the type that are fulfilled, but in a much better way in the reality.

Jesus is not of Levi but is of a superior High Priesthood. He didn't offer Himself again and again, but offered Himself once. And He made purification once, right at the beginning.

Now why did it happen this way? Well because Jesus' sacrifice happened at one time, and will not be repeated, and those elements that are associated could only happen then.

And this means that all Christians have an opportunity to avail themselves of this purification of sins.

In the type the sins were removed toward the end of the year, but each person had a chance to participate in this corporate provision for all sins. By doing it right at the beginning all Christians have had an opportunity to avail themselves of the purification that Jesus made.

He made one corporate provision for sins, and then went into the presence of God. This is the fulfillment of the type.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: bugkiller
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
That is your take. But consider that most of them did not want to leave. Many of them had served the denomination for years in leadership roles, and no one questioned that they were part of the movement.

For many of them they studied for quite some time before leaving, and in some cases they never left but still couldn't accept it all (Fletcher, Cottrell, etc.).

Ford certainly didn't want to leave. He still believes in Ellen White as far as I know, and wanted to explain his way of reconciling it all. I think when he did finally leave the denomination it was because he wanted to be ordained in the new ministry he started, so he joined some other fellowship if I recall.

Note what Andreasen said back in his day. And of course, Andreasen's credentials are so undoubted that t7c quoted his study on the subject a bunch of posts back.


Warning from M. L. Andreasen
The history of this movement shows that we have not always profited by heresies as we might. Ballenger headed a movement attacking the doctrine of the sanctuary. This occasioned a review of this question, but the study was mostly aimed at refuting charges leveled against us and did not involve the larger aspects and inspirations of our teaching. As soon as the immediate crisis was past, we did little or no further official study, though sharp differences and divergent views had been revealed that should have called for an exhaustive investigation of the subject.
When Conradi had his hearings, we were not much better off; and Fletcher was perplexed by the many different views he met among our men in Washington. True, we did some studying as we were faced with the necessity of meeting theissue; but again, as soon as the crisis was past, we felt our work done. To the best of my knowledge and belief, there has been no official or authorized study since then. We shall be unprepared when another crisis occurs.
I doubt that we fully appreciate how much these heresies have undermined the faith of the ministry in our doctrine of the sanctuary. If my experience as a teacher in the Seminary may be taken as a criterion, I would say that a large number of our ministers have serious doubt as to the correctness of the views we hold on certain phases of the sanctuary. They believe, in a general way, that we are correct, but they are as fully assured that Ballenger's views have never been fully met and that we cannot meet them. Not wishing to make the matter an issue, they simply decide that the question is not vital - and thus the whole subject of the sanctuary is relegated, in their minds at least, to the background. This is not a wholesome situation. If the subject is as vital as we have thought and taught it to be, it is notof secondary importance. Today, in the minds of a considerable part of the ministry, as far as my experience in the Seminary is concerned, it has little vital bearing, either in their lives or theology.
I dread to see the day when our enemies will make capital of our weakness. I dread still more to see the day when our ministry will begin to raise questions.

Well he was right, and the folks did start questioning. I posted Cottrell's survey of Adventist scholars back before they called the closed Committee on Questions in Daniel. Cottrell revised the Bible readings for the home. He was one of the primary contributors to the SDA Bible Commentary. He was an Adventists until he died. But still could not accept the IJ at the end, after years of trying to make it work.


During the Daniel Committee they were divided and never released the results. Then when Ford raised issues they held a hearing but largely based the decision on his treatment of Ellen White's material (despite the fact that he still accepts her on some level).

Now sense then we have had DARCOM, and tons of dissertations on the subject, because they realized they had to answer all of these. And lay ministers also turned their hand to addressing issues. But the same problems keep coming up because of the texts, not because of Ford. I doubt most have read Ford's book. And I doubt most who have agree with Ford on a number of points.

Hi tall,

Yes I understand that people come and go in all faiths because of various reasons. As I see it this also happened in the days of the apostles and the early church and is why I provided the previous scripture they went out from us because they were not of us. Paul was quick to see that the mystery of iniquity was already working in the early church. Jesus warned us of this happening in the last days.

Peter knew about it saying there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privately shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. There is nothing new under the sun here in my opinion and nothing that we have not been warned about in God's WORD.

This is why I appreciated T7C earlier post # 100 as it highlights that our only safegaurd is in prayerfully seeking God's truth through his WORD asking Jesus to be our teacher and guide and becoming as little children.

Thanks for your thoughts.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I think historically there are only two options.

Antiochus--This is the one most protestants go with. However, I am not certain he meets all of the criteria as stated. So I don't necessarily favor this one.

Rome-- This is the Adventist view, and I think makes more sense of a number of the criteria. One weak spot I see is taking the antecedent to be winds rather than horns, but I suppose you can make some linguistic arguments for it. The south, east and pleasant land fit. Rome actually crucified the prince of the host if you take that as Jesus (the other view takes it to be the high priest). The Romans actually cast down the sanctuary, as opposed to merely defiling it, and of course it literally ended the daily sacrifices. Now as to papal, you could argue the other points of Adventist thought. Still weighing that one out. Rome makes more sense of a fierce king at the end of the Seleucid reign. Antiochus was more to the middle, and while he was fierce towards the Israelites, overall he was terribly successful. Tying the horn to mulitple kings of Rome is a bit odd, but it could represent a kingdom. That is a little out of character. So there are some pros and cons to either view.

In any interpretation including Rome you would have the day year principle applied. I think Shea's article on the subject is interesting, with a number of arguments. I do see some against it as well, but that is another topic.

I don't have any issue with the Adventist 70 weeks teaching at this time. It does not depend on the year day in any case as it is 70 sevens, analogous to the sabbatical years.

I am open to other views, but the starting kingdoms limit them incredibly.

No, at least not in the Adventist interpretation. I am fine with you making it come out of Greece if you want, but you won't get to the Adventist view.

Well I guess it depends on which adventist view I guess. Seems there are a few on the origin of the little Horn. I do not have any problem with it coming out of the four horns of the goats broken large horn. This tends to be more towards the pioneer interprestions of Uriah Smith's

"The little horn of Dan.8 does not symbolize Antiochus Epiphanes, but it does symbolize Rome. To prove this is easy. If people would only treat interpretations of prophecy as they treat bank-bills, that is, compare them with the detector to see if they are genuine, there would be no trouble. Our only wonder is that any one could ever have supposed the application to Antiochus to be genuine.

We say, then, that the little horn of Dan.8 does not symbolize Antiochus, but
does symbolize Rome, because,

1. This horn came out of one of the four horns of the goat. Verse 9. It was therefore another horn separate and distinct from any of the four. One of these four horns, as we have seen, was the kingdom of Syria, founded by Seleucus, from whom sprung the famous line of kings known in history as the Seleucidae.

Of these there were twenty-six, in order as follows:- 1. Seleucus Nicator. 2. Antiochus Soter. 3. Antiochus Theus. 4. Seleucus Callinicus. 5. Seleucus Ceraunus. 6. Antiochus the Great. 7. Seleucus Philopater. 8. Antiochus Epiphanes. 9. Antiochus Eupator. 10. Demetrius Soter. 11.
Alexander Bala. 12. Demetrius Nicator. 13. Antiochus Theos. 14. Antiochus Sidetes. 15. Zebia. 16. Seleucus, son of Nicator. 17. Antiochus Grypus. 18. Antiochus the Cyzicenian. 19. Seleucus, the son of Grypus. 20. Antiochus Eusebes. 21. Antiochus, second son of Grypus. 22. Philip, third son of Grypus. 23. Demetrius Eucheres. 24. Antiochus Dionysius. 25. Tigranes. 26. Antiochus Asiaticus, who was the last of the Seleucidae, and who, after an insignificant reign of four years, was driven from his dominions by Pompey, the Roman, B.C. 65.

It will thus be seen that Antiochus Epiphanes was simply one of the twenty-six kings who constituted the Syrian horn of the goat. He was for the time being that horn; hence he could not be at the same time a separate and independent power, or another remarkable horn, as the little horn was. Rome was such a separate horn, and, from the stand-point of this prophecy, came out of one of the horns of the goat, thus answering exactly to the prophetic description.

In the year 161 B.C., Rome became connected with the Jews by the famous Jewish League, 1 Mac. 8; Josephus' Antiq., b. xii., chap. x., sec. 6; Prideaux, vol. ii., p. 166. Nations are noticed in prophecy when they become connected with God's people. Right here the conquering legions of the Roman power came into the prophet's view. But just seven years before this, B.C. 168, Rome had conquered Macedonia (one of the four horns of the goat), adding it to its empire. And as if coming from that horn, the prophet beholds it from that point pursuing its triumphant career. It is therefore spoken of as coming forth from that horn.

2. Were we to apply the little horn to any one of these twenty-six Syrian kings, it should be to the most illustrious and powerful one of them all. But this was not Antiochus Epiphanes. For historians inform us that his name, Epiphanes, the illustrious, was changed to Epimanes, the fool, on account of his vile and extravagant folly.

The little horn cannot apply to Antiochus, but must signify the Roman power,
because,

3. This little horn, in comparison with the preceding kingdoms, Media and Persia, waxed "exceeding great." There is in the prophecy a regularly increasing gradation of power: great, very great, exceeding great. Applying the little horn to Antiochus, the following result is presented: 1. "Great," Persia. True. 2. "Very great," Grecia. True. 3. "Exceeding great," Antiochus. Nonsense. The Persian empire is simply called "great," though it ruled "from India even unto Ethiopia, over an hundred and twenty and seven provinces." Grecia, still more extensive and powerful, is called "very great." Then comes the power in question, which is called "exceeding great." Was Antiochus great in comparison with Alexander, who conquered the world? or with the Romans, who conquered vastly more than all of Alexander's dominions? The kingdom of Antiochus was only a portion of the empire ruled by the goat. Is a part more than the whole? Of the relation between Antiochus and the Romans, the Religious Encyclopedia says: "Finding his resources exhausted, he [Antiochus] resolved to go into Persia to levy tributes and collect large sums which he had agreed to pay to the Romans."

Can any king be said to have waxed exceeding great, when he left his kingdom no larger than he found it? But Sir Isaac Newton testifies that Antiochus did not enlarge his dominions. He made some temporary conquests in Egypt, but immediately relinquished them when the Romans took the part of Ptolemy and commanded him to give them up. It surely cannot take any one long to decide which was the greater power, the one which evacuated Egypt or the one which commanded that evacuation; the one compelled to pay tribute, or the one to whom he was compelled to pay it.

One was Antiochus; the other was Rome. With Rome as the third member of the
series, we have this result: 1. "Great," Persia. True. 2. "Very great," Grecia. True.
3. "Exceeding great," Rome. More emphatically true than either or both the
others.

4. The little horn was to stand up against the Prince of princes, by which title, without doubt, our Lord is meant. But Antiochus died 164 years before Christ was born. There was a power, however, which did stand up against the Saviour. Rome was then in the zenith of its glory. And Rome, in the person of Herod, endeavored to destroy the infant Jesus. Subsequently, when Pilate was itsmouth-piece in Judea, it nailed him to the cross. The same work is attributed to the great red dragon of Rev.12, a symbol referring so evidently to Rome that none care to dispute the application.

Antiochus answers not one specification of the prophecy; and here we may therefore dismiss him. But, for a more full elucidation of the prophecy, we may further say of Rome:-

5. This horn was "little" at first. So was Rome, but it "waxed," or grew, "exceeding great" in three several directions. What better terms could be used to describe the course of that power which from a small beginning rose to be the mistress of the world?

6. It gathered dominion toward the south. Egypt was made a province of the
Roman empire B.C. 30, and continued such for over six centuries.

7. It marched its conquering legions toward the east. Rome subjugated Syria
B.C. 63, and made it a province of the empire.

8. It set its face toward the pleasant land. Judea is so called in many scriptures. Ps.106:24; Zech.7:14; etc. First by a league of assistance and friendship the Romans took under their influence the holy land and people. They subsequently made Judea a Roman province, and finally destroyed the city of Jerusalem, burned their beautiful temple with fire, and scattered the Jews over the face of the whole earth to be gathered no more till time shall end.

9. It waxed great even to the host of heaven. These terms, used in a symbolic sense in reference to earthly scenes, must denote persons of illustrious character or exalted position. The great red dragon, Rev.12:4, Pagan Rome, is said to have cast down a third part of the stars of heaven to the ground. This is the same power, and we think the same work, referring to its acts of oppressing the Jews and deposing their rulers.

10. By him the daily (not daily sacrifice, as our translators have supplied, but
daily desolation, which is paganism) was taken away, and the transgression of
desolation, the papacy, was set up.. Chap.11:31. Rome, and Rome alone, did this. While Rome was ruler, the religion of the empire was changed from paganism to that corrupted form of Christianity known as the papacy. And the place where paganism had long had
its sanctuary, Rome with its Pantheon, or temple of all the gods, was cast down, or degraded to the second rank, by the removal of the seat of government to Constantinople, in A.D. 330. So in Rev.13:2, the dragon, Pagan Rome, gave to the beast, Papal Rome, his seat, the city of Rome, and great authority.

11. An host was given him against the daily. The barbarians that subverted the Roman empire became converts to that nominal Christianity before which they were thus brought face to face, and were soon transformed into willing instruments whereby their former religion, paganism, was dethroned. No other power has in any respect fulfilled this prophecy.

12. In the interpretation, verse 23, it is called a king of fierce countenance and understanding dark sentences. Such was emphatically Rome, with its warlike paraphernalia, and its strange language which the Jews did not understand. Moses uses similar language, referring, as all agree, to the Romans. Deut. 28:49,50.

13. It was to stand up in the latter time of their kingdom, when the dominion of
the four horns of the goat was drawing to an end. There Rome appeared.

14. It was to destroy wonderfully. Hear all opposing powers, which it so rudely
overthrew, testify, Thus did Rome.

15. Rome has destroyed the mighty and holy people, the people of God, more
than all other powers combined. A many-tongued voice from the blood of more
than fifty millions of martyrs, goes up to testify against it.

16. And it has "practiced,"-practiced its deceptions upon the people, and its
schemes of cunning among the nations, to gain its own ends, and aggrandize its
power.

17. And it has "prospered." It has made war with the saints, and worn them
out and prevailed against them.

18. It has run its allotted career, and is to be "broken without hand." Verse 25. How clear a reference to the stone cut out without hand which is to smite the image upon its feet and dash it to pieces. So the papacy is soon to perish in the consuming glories of the second coming of our Lord. Thus Rome fulfills all the specifications of the prophecy. No other kingdom meets even one. Rome is the power in question. No other can be." (U. Smith, The Sanctuary and the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14).

To me this has a better fit then the four winds application but not that different. Although in my vire I think both are correct. The Roman Empire came out of conqouring one of the four horns and was a separate horn to the other four fitting all the scripture criterea outlined above. No other kingdom comes close to matching all the scriptures criterea.

Seems your views here may be simiar to mine and the early Pioneeers?

Thanks for your thoughts.
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
No, it does not in fact mention the sins of God's people in that connection. The "until when" is in regards to the trampling, etc.

Just because a verse does not mention "sins of the people" does not mean that the purpose of the sanctuary is not for the cleansing the sins of the people. To be more accurate however, the day of atonement is for the cleansing of all the sins of God's people from the Sanctuary. If you connect the Sanctuary to judgement from Daniel 7:9-10 then you have the great day of atonement. All were required to afflict their souls in seeking God's mercy (Leviticus 23:27-32).

You just left Daniel 8. Daniel 8 says where the problem was coming from--the little horn. The defilement of an outside power is not the same as the corporate cleansing of all sin in the Day of Atonement.

The points were made showing the parallels in both Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 and their connection to the restoration of the daily sacrifice, Sanctuary and God's truth at the end of the 2300 day/year prophecy. It also shows the connection of the Sanctuary linked to judgement which is for the cleansing of sin. This time period being well after the establsihement of the little horn and the acts of the little horn. What you are suggesting above is correct if the application was to the earlthy sanctuary however it is not the application here is well into the NEW COVENANT so the application has to be to the Heavenly Sanctuary not the earthly. Therefore represents the restoration of the Sanctuary truth, the understanding of Crhists ministration, the judgement and the cleansing of God's people from Sin (Anti-typical day of Atonement) taking place in heaven on our behalf.

Jesus is the High Priest of the heavenly sanctuary, which is the true. We agree. But that is not referenced in Daniel 8.

Ideed very true, but what needs to be considered here as well I believe with the overall context is the

1. the time periods that are being discussed in the restoration of the daily sacrifice (which is for sin) and

2. the function and purpose of the Sanctuary in relation to judgement (e.g. What was the purpose of the daily sacrifices? What was the purpose of the Sanctuary? and What was the purpose of the Sanctuary in relation to judgement and cleansing)

As agreed on earlier, we both agree that it is the little Horn that causes all the problems. After the little horns establsihment it...

* Speaks great things against the most high 7v8; 7v25
* Casts down thrones, hosts and the stars of heaven 7v9; 8v10
* Tramples on the daily sacrifice and the Sanctuary and God’s truth 8v11
* Magnifies himself even to the prince of the host 8v11
* Has power to persecutes the saints of the most high 7v21-25
* Thinks to change times and laws 7v25

The judgement only takes place after all these things that the little horn does (7v9-11)
This is linked to Daniel 8:13-14 v13, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? v14, he said to me, To two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. In both Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 we see the parallel of the Judgement and the cleansing and restoring of the daily sacfrifice, the sanctuary and God's truth happening after 2300 days/years.

This time frame puts both the judgement and the restoration of God's truth taking place well after the establishment of the NEW COVENANT, well after the death of Jesus where we have no more earthly Sanctuary. However in the NEW COVENANT the earthly Sanctuary was only ever a pattern of the Heavenly. In my view Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 cannot be talking about the earthly Sanctuary as the timeline is in the NEW COVENANT well after the establishment of the little horn. Therefore it must be in reference to the ministration of the Heavenly Sanctuary and Christs work on our behalf and confession of sin (daily sacrifice) so now we apply type to anti-type

HEBREWS 8:2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.

HEBREWS 8:5 Who serve to the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, said he, that you make all things according to the pattern showed to you in the mount.

HEBREWS 9:1-23,
[1],Then truly the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
[2], For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the show bread; which is called the sanctuary.
[3], And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;
[4], Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;
[5], And over it the cherubim of glory shadowing the mercy seat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.
[6], Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.
[7], But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:
[8], The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
[9], Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
[10], Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
[11], But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;

HEBREWS 9:23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

It is the restoration of the Sanctuary truth, the judgement and cleansing of the heavenly Sancuary and confession of sin and God's truth that is to be restored after the 2300 days. The judgement and cleansing of the Sanctuary determines who is in the book of life (shown earlier) and the establishment of God's everlasting kingdom which is given to the Saints.

Look at the question again:

13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?

How long will the activity of the little horn continue, the sanctuary and host being trodden under foot, the daily sacrifice being taken away, etc.

And the answer addresses the activity of the little horn (just as Daniel 7 is showing the judgment on the little horn and the deliverance of the saints).

14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed/restored.

Restored from what? From what the question asked, from the activity of the little horn.

Indeed agreed (see above). Do you see what what this results in?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I do not doubt that many aspects of the Day of Atonement will be fulfilled in their proper time in the type. However, the death, and entry into the sanctuary, and presentation in God's presence all happened in the first century. Those events will not be repeated. So those aspects of the Day of Atonement were fulfilled.
On the earthly day of atonement the sacrificial sin offereing which is done in the outer court of the Sanctuary (earth).

The annual day of atonement and cleansing of the Sanctuary is different from the daily atonement from sin of the individual. Throughout the year all the sins of God's people were atoned for by the sin offereings and animal sacrifices and taken into the Sanctuary.

It was only once a year that the high Priest had to make atonement for God's people. During this time (Day of atonement and the cleansing of the Sanctuary from all the sins held there throughout the year) God's people were instructed that during this solumn time..

LEVITICUS 23:27-32
[27], Also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be a day of atonement: it shall be an holy convocation to you; and you shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by fire to the LORD.
[28], And you shall do no work in that same day: for it is a day of atonement, to make an atonement for you before the LORD your God.
[29], For whatever soul it be that shall not be afflicted in that same day, he shall be cut off from among his people.
[30], And whatever soul it be that does any work in that same day, the same soul will I destroy from among his people.
[31], You shall do no manner of work: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations in all your dwellings.
[32], It shall be to you a sabbath of rest, and you shall afflict your souls: in the ninth day of the month at even, from even to even, shall you celebrate your sabbath.

It is clear that this is a different atonement for sin when compared to the daily atonement for sin. This was a work that only the high priest could perform on behalf of ALL of God's people for all the sins confessed within the Sanctuary throughout the year and one that only Jesus performs on our behalf in the NEW COVENANT for the daily cleansing of sin in his people individually and collectivlety in the final cleansing of the Heavenly Sanctuary as outlined in Daniel 7 and Daniel 8.
Moreover, note what it says about purification:
Hebrews 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high

By the time Jesus sat at the right hand of God He had already made purification for sins corporately. Now in the type the high priest, would make a cleansing application of blood. There was no investigation by the High Priest in the temple. He didn't investigate any books. He made a presentation of blood for purification. That is the same thing Jesus did once. Then He sat down at the right hand of God. Now outside the temple the people only benefited if they trusted in what the priest was doing, afflicted themselves, etc. What we see is that right at the beginning of the Christian message Jesus fulfilled those parts of all the feasts--the blood work of sacrifice and presentation of blood--that related to purgation of sins. Then He did what the High Priest never could. Instead of leaving the sanctuary He sat down at the right hand of God, having completed that work.
I do not disagree that the way opened into the heavenly Sanctuary by Jesus as our great high priest because not only is he our high priest but he is also our sacrifice. This is clearly outlined in the book of Hebrews. I think what is not being discussed however is the purpose of the daily sacrifices for sin (daily confession and cleansing of the individual from sin and the day of atonement; which is the cleansing of the Sanctuary from all the sins of God's people collectively) as partly discussed in Daniel, Leviticus, Hebrews.

HEBREWS 8 and HEBREWS 9 explain nicely why the way into the most holy place is opened up. Although it is not saying here that because Jesus sits at the right hand of God that this was in reference to the cleansing of the Sanctuary and the day of Atonement which the earthly was pointing to.

...............

Why the Most Holy place is opened and why it was not opened in the earthly...

The New Priestly Service...

Hebrews 8; Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, and not man.
3 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. Therefore it is necessary that this One also have something to offer. 4 For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law; 5 who serve the copy and shadow of the heavenly things, as Moses was divinely instructed when he was about to make the tabernacle. For He said, “See that you make all things according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.” 6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.

A New Covenant...

7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second. 8 Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah—9 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the LORD. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 11 None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. 12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.”
13 In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

The Earthly Sanctuary

Hebrews 9 Then indeed, even the first covenant had ordinances of divine service and the earthly sanctuary. 2 For a tabernacle was prepared: the first part, in which was the lampstand, the table, and the showbread, which is called the sanctuary; 3 and behind the second veil, the part of the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of All, 4 which had the golden censer and the ark of the covenant overlaid on all sides with gold, in which were the golden pot that had the manna, Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tablets of the covenant; 5 and above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat. Of these things we cannot now speak in detail.

Limitations of the Earthly Service...

6 Now when these things had been thus prepared, the priests always went into the first part of the tabernacle, performing the services. 7 But into the second part the high priest went alone once a year, not without blood, which he offered for himself and for the people’s sins committed in ignorance; 8 the Holy Spirit indicating this, that the way into the Holiest of All was not yet made manifest while the first tabernacle was still standing. 9 It was symbolic for the present time in which both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make him who performed the service perfect in regard to the conscience—10 concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation.

The Heavenly Sanctuary...

11 But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation. 12 Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh, 14 how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? 15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

This has nothing to do with the Great day of atonement and the cleansing of the Sanctuary outlined in Leviticus or has it been fulfilled.
In the type the sins were removed toward the end of the year, but each person had a chance to participate in this corporate provision for all sins. By doing it right at the beginning all Christians have had an opportunity to avail themselves of the purification that Jesus made. He made one corporate provision for sins, and then went into the presence of God. This is the fulfillment of the type.
If you are saying the cleansing of the Heavenly Sanctuary from sin as typified as the Day of Atonement has been fufilled then this has no basis in scripture as outlined above.

Hope this is helpful.
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Yes, they would be linked in this scenario. But you just added again to the text. The little horn is judged. We agree with that. But neither Daniel 7 or 8 hints at any judgment of the saints. They are portrayed as saints the whole time, and the little horn is portrayed as a destroying and persecuting power the whole time.
This is true but I think what you are missing here is that all those who profess to be God's people are in the BOOK of LIFE. This is why I provided the scriptures to define what book was used in the judgement described in Daniel 7:9-11 in post # 176. This is the book of life that all are written into that profess to be followers of God.

It is at the judgement that these names are kept in the book of life or blotted out of the book of life.

DANIEL 7:9-10 [9], I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. [10], A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered to him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.

God’s saints are determined at the Judgement and found in the opened book of life.

DANIEL 12:1 [1], And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which stands for the children of your people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time your people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

REVELATION 3:5 He that overcomes, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

REVELATION 13:8 And all that dwell on the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

REVELATION 17:8 The beast that you saw was and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

REVELATION 21:27, And there shall in no wise enter into it anything that defiles, neither whatever works abomination, or makes a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

So it is at the judgement that each case is decided whether to remain in God's book of life or wheather they are blotted out of God's Book of life. This was a similar purpose to the earlthy day of Atonement which points to the heavenly.

The judgement and the book of life (Daniel 7:9-11) does indeed show the judgement of the saints as those that are in the book of LIFE can be blotted out come judgement day.
The restoration of the sanctuary is distinctly said to be from the activity of the little horn. But a defiled sanctuary is not the same as a properly functioning sanctuary service. Look at the text I referenced in the case of Hezekiah. The sanctuary was defiled by an outside source and had to be restored. That is what is happening here as well.
Already discussed in the previous post. This is correct if we are referencing the earlthy Sanctuary. In this case was are not because the timeline puts us well into the NEW COVENANT past the death of Jesus when there is no more earthly Sanctuary to restore. So this idea is impossible as Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 can only be in reference to the Heavenly Sanctuary, confession of sin God's truth and the restoration of all three in relation to the judgement (Daniel 7:9-11).
Surely you didn't miss the next verse did you?
12 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

This is not talking about the IJ. There is a resurrection going on!
Now tall, why would I need to read the next verse the purpose of the scriptures posted on the books was ONLY to determine what books were opened on the day of Judgement in Daniel 7:9-11. The scriptures I posted to you were only to demonstrate that the books opened were the book of life that on judgement day anyone professing to be God's people can be blotted out from. This show that the judgement is to God's people. This all takes place prior to God giving his people the kingdom AFTER the judgement.
All very true. But Daniel 12 ties that to the time of the resurrection.
DITTO" see above this was not the purpose in using Daniel 12. It was used to show the reference to the Book of life used in the judgement.

Hope this clarifies any confusion here.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Peter knew about it saying there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privately shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. There is nothing new under the sun here in my opinion and notihing that we have not been warned about in God's WORD.

This is why I appreciated T7C earlear post # 100 as it highlights that our only safegaurd is in prayerfully seeking God's truth through his WORD asking Jesus to be our teacher and guide and becoming as little children.

Thanks for your thoughts.


Well, the people following God's word in 1843 knew that Jesus said in a day you know not the Lord will come, and that no one knows the day or hour, and that about dates and times there was no need to write.

And they were correct. And William Miller, the false prophet, was demonstrably wrong.

But the Adventists condemned those who followed what God's word said.

But that was not enough. Ellen White said that God was in the false message of the false prophet. And Adventists have insisted ever since that those who followed the words of Jesus and rejected Miller's message were lost.

From this the IJ, and the Adventist church was born.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: listed
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Well I guess it depends on which adventist view I guess. Seems there are a few on the origin of the little Horn. I do not have any problem with it coming out of the four horns of the goats broken large horn. This tends to be more towards the pioneer interprestions of Uriah Smith's

That would mean Rome came from Greece at the time of Alexander's death, which clearly is not the case. Hence the DARCOM series had to go with the other interpretation because Uriah Smith's was untenable.

Do you also hold to the daily being paganism, as does Uriah? Because that doesn't match your earlier posts.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Just because a verse does not mention "sins of the people" does not mean that the purpose of the sanctuary is not for the cleansing the sins of the people.

Of course the sanctuary was for the cleansing of the people. But this is not talking about cleansing in the normal course of the sanctuary. This is cleansing from outside defilement by the little horn.


To be more accurate however, the day of atonement is for the cleansing of all the sins of God's people from the Sanctuary. If you connect the Sanctuary to judgement from Daniel 7:9-10 then you have the great day of atonement.

Daniel 7 says nothing about judging individuals. It delivers the saints from the little horn power.

And yes, the activity done in the temple was for cleansing--a cleansing application of blood. That happened in the first century. Only in the first century did Jesus die, and go present Himself in God's presence, purging sins.

All were required to afflict their souls in seeking God's mercy (Leviticus 23:27-32).
Yes, and all who are His have since Jesus made the one sacrifice--in the first century.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Seems your views here may be simiar to mine and the early Pioneeers?

Thanks for your thoughts.

I think Rome matches up better, though there are still some questions.

But as to Uriah Smith, I agree with him very little.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The points were made showing the parallels in both Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 and their connection to the restoration of the daily sacrifice, Sanctuary and God's truth at the end of the 2300 day/year prophecy. It also shows the connection of the Sanctuary linked to judgement which is for the cleansing of sin. This time period being well after the establsihement of the little horn and the acts of the little horn. What you are suggesting above is correct if the application was to the earlthy samctuary however it is not the application here is well into the NEW COVENANT so the application has to be to the Heavenly Sanctuary not the earthly. Therefore represents the restoration of the Sanctuary truth, the understanding of Crhists ministration, the judgement and the cleansing of God's people from Sin (Anti-typical day of Atonement) taking place in heaven on our behalf.
Except Daniel 7 says none of that. It shows no judgment on individuals. And your reading in the false date setting of the Adventists is not at all pictured in Daniel.

Ideed very true, but what needs to be considered here as well I believe with the overall context is the

1. the time periods that are being discussed in the restoration of the daily sacrifice (which is for sin) and

2. the function and purpose of the Sanctuary in relation to judgement (e.g. What was the purpose of the daily sacrifices? What was the purpose of the Sanctuary? and What was the purpose of the Sanctuary in relation to judgement and cleansing)

As agreed on earlier, we both agree that it is the little Horn that causes all the problems. After the little horns establsihment it...

* Speaks great things against the most high 7v8; 7v25
* Casts down thrones, hosts and the stars of heaven 7v9; 8v10
* Tramples on the daily sacrifice and the Sanctuary and God’s truth 8v11
* Magnifies himself even to the prince of the host 8v11
* Has power to persecutes the saints of the most high 7v21-25
* Thinks to change times and laws 7v25

The judgement only takes place after all these things that the little horn does (7v9-11)
This is linked to Daniel 8:13-14 v13, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? v14, he said to me, To two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. In both Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 we see the parallel of the Judgement and the cleansing and restoring of the daily sacfrifice, the sanctuary and God's truth happening after 2300 days/years.

We see in Dan. 7 and 8 the judgment on the little horn, which takes away its activity against God. The rest you have read in.

This time frame puts both the judgement and the restoration of God's truth taking place well after the establishment of the NEW COVENANT, well after the death of Jesus where we have no more earthly Sanctuary. However in the NEW COVENANT the earthly Sanctuary was only ever a pattern of the Heavenly. In my view Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 cannot be talking about the earthly Sanctuary as the timeline is in the NEW COVENANT well after the establishment of the little horn. Therefore it must be in reference to the ministration of the Heavenly Sanctuary and Christs work on our behalf and confession of sin (daily sacrifice) so now we apply type to anti-type

HEBREWS 8:2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.

HEBREWS 8:5 Who serve to the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, said he, that you make all things according to the pattern showed to you in the mount.

HEBREWS 9:1-23,
[1],Then truly the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
[2], For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the show bread; which is called the sanctuary.
[3], And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;
[4], Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;
[5], And over it the cherubim of glory shadowing the mercy seat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.
[6], Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.
[7], But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:
[8], The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
[9], Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
[10], Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
[11], But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;

HEBREWS 9:23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

We agree that any timer period that long would deal with the heavenly. Although, if you apply the day year you could theoretically still have a restoration of the earthly. Some might think that, but I don't see that in the text.

It is the restoration of the Sanctuary truth, the judgement and cleansing of the heavenly Sancuary and confession of sin and God's truth that is to be restored after the 2300 days.
The cleansing is a blood sacrifice and presentation in God's presence--that only happened once.

The judgement and cleansing of the Sanctuary

The sacrifice and cleansing application of blood happened only at one time--first century.

The judgment dealt with the people's reception of it, and that can only happen later, throughout the time since Christ's work of sacrifice.

The picture of blood application was not judgment but--purification of sins. And the Scriptures already explained that:

Hebrews 1:3b when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:

That happened in the first century. Now you could argue that Rome obscured that, but that work only happened at one time.

determines who is in the book of life (shown earlier) and the establishment of God's everlasting kingdom which is given to the Saints.

The book of life is not mentioned in Daniel 7--which is why you had to quote it from Daniel 12, noting the time period of the resurrection.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
On the earthly day of atonement the sacrificial sin offereing which is done in the outer court of the Sanctuary (earth).

The annual day of atonement and cleansing of the Sanctuary is different from the daily atonement from sin of the individual.

Agreed. And in Jesus' actions in the first century we see a sacrifice, and presentation in God's presence, resulting in corporate purifying for all sin.

3b when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high

That is the provision for all sins, of all time. There won't be another provision.


It was only once a year that the high Priest had to make atonement for God's people. During this time (Day of atonement and the cleansing of the Sanctuary from all the sins held there throughout the year)

And it was once for all time that Jesus made the fulfillment of that:

23 Therefore it was necessary that the copies of the things in the heavens should be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; 25 not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another

It affirms the necessity of cleansing.

It describes in the past tense that Jesus entered the holy places
It indicates this is the true temple, heaven itself.
He appears in God's presence on our behalf.
it is directly contrasted with the yearly entry of the high priest with blood. Jesus didn't have to do it often, He did it once.

 
Upvote 0