I have begun studying Des Ford's thesis on the Investigative Judgement.
I am interested in looking at various views on this doctrine?
I have already stumbled across what I feel is an error in the thesis on page 31 (comparisons between 19th and 20th century) where Des claims that 20th century Adventists believe that the doctrine was not introduced until 15 years after 1844.
This is a rather surprising claim because I find on Wikipedia for example that he experienced this revelation the very next morning whilst walking through a cornfield Trying to avoid scornful neighbours.
It would hardly seem consistent that 19th century viewed it as October 23rd and 21st century claims to agree with 19th and yet 20th differs. This has me thinking that Des told a porky as clearly it was not a 20th-century Adventist view at all.
Also, Des appears at first glance to be stating that Daniel 8:14 is not a dual prophecy, that it is literal for those times, however, in verse 15-17 it clearly states this is about end times...
Whether or not it is a physical building i think is a bit of a nitpick, the function of the heavenly sanctuary is clearly mirrored in the earthly one. So even if the earthly is merely representative of a metaphorical heavenly institution rather than a building, does that actually make any difference to the IJ doctrine?
I am interested in looking at various views on this doctrine?
I have already stumbled across what I feel is an error in the thesis on page 31 (comparisons between 19th and 20th century) where Des claims that 20th century Adventists believe that the doctrine was not introduced until 15 years after 1844.
This is a rather surprising claim because I find on Wikipedia for example that he experienced this revelation the very next morning whilst walking through a cornfield Trying to avoid scornful neighbours.
It would hardly seem consistent that 19th century viewed it as October 23rd and 21st century claims to agree with 19th and yet 20th differs. This has me thinking that Des told a porky as clearly it was not a 20th-century Adventist view at all.
Also, Des appears at first glance to be stating that Daniel 8:14 is not a dual prophecy, that it is literal for those times, however, in verse 15-17 it clearly states this is about end times...
15While I, Daniel, was watching the vision and trying to understand it, there stood before me one having the appearance of a man. 16And I heard the voice of a man calling from between the banks of the Ulai: “Gabriel, explain the vision to this man.”17As he came near to where I stood, I was terrified and fell facedown.
“Son of man,” he said to me, “understand that the vision concerns the time of the end.”
Des writes that the 20th century Adventist view is that the heavenly sanctuary is not a building but is heaven itself. When i read Hebrews 9, my comprehensions skills in English tell me that Paul is stating that the earthly Sanctuary is a COPY of the heavenly one.“Son of man,” he said to me, “understand that the vision concerns the time of the end.”
23So it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24For Christ did not enter a man-made copy of the true sanctuary, but He entered heaven itself, now to appear on our behalf in the presence of God.
Whether or not it is a physical building i think is a bit of a nitpick, the function of the heavenly sanctuary is clearly mirrored in the earthly one. So even if the earthly is merely representative of a metaphorical heavenly institution rather than a building, does that actually make any difference to the IJ doctrine?
Last edited: