The purpose of this site is to examine objections to the Seventh-day Adventist sanctuary doctrine. The official Fundamental Beliefs statement adopted by the Seventh-day Adventist Church states:
There is a sanctuary in heaven, the true tabernacle which the Lord set up and not man. In it Christ ministers on our behalf, making available to believers the benefits of His atoning sacrifice offered once for all on the cross. He was inaugurated as our great High Priest and began His intercessory ministry at the time of His ascension. In 1844, at the end of the prophetic period of 2300 days, He entered the second and last phase of His atoning ministry. It is a work of investigative judgment which is part of the ultimate disposition of all sin, typified by the cleansing of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. In that typical service the sanctuary was cleansed with the blood of animal sacrifices, but the heavenly things are purified with the perfect sacrifice of the blood of Jesus. (Adventist Fundamental Belief #24)
From this statement we can see several important aspects of the Adventist sanctuary teaching:
1. The focus is on activity in the true sanctuary, in heaven, where Christ went to minister on our behalf at His ascension, making available the benefits of his atoning sacrifice.
2. The sacrifice of Christ is seen as a "once-for-all" sacrifice on the cross. All of the sacrifices of the earthly system, such as sin offerings, fellowship offerings, burnt offerings, etc. were fulfilled by Jesus' one perfect sacrifice.
3. At His ascension Christ began His ministry as our High Priest.
4. Jesus entered a second, last phase of His High Priestly ministry beginning in the year 1844. For Adventists this date of 1844 is derived from study of the prophecy of the 2300 evenings and mornings of Daniel 8:14.
5. Jesus' ministry in the heavenly sanctuary involves an investigative judgment. This is part of the disposition of all sin.
6. The investigative judgment that Jesus performs in the heavenly sanctuary is seen to be the fulfillment of the Day of Atonement cleansing of the earthly sanctuary in the Old Testament type. The heavenly sanctuary is cleansed by the blood of Jesus.
This concept of the cleansing of the sanctuary comes from the Day of Atonement service which is spelled out in Leviticus chapter 16. Additional regulations are given in Leviticus 23, along with regulations for the other important appointed times in the Israelite calendar.
While the Adventist Fundamental Beliefs statement provides an official basis for spelling out the basics of the teaching, there are some additional details that it would be good to review. As there are some differences in how individual members of the church have presented the doctrine I will quote from the writings of Ellen White. These writings are considered by the Seventh-day Adventist church to "speak with prophetic authority" (Fundamental Belief #18). For this reason they represent a baseline doctrine that most Adventists can agree upon.
Chapter 28 of the book The Great Controversy provides a succinct description of the teaching. I will look at a few highlights from that chapter in order to list additional aspects of the sanctuary doctrine.
Attended by heavenly angels, our great High Priest enters the holy of holies and there appears in the presence of God to engage in the last acts of His ministration in behalf of man--to perform the work of investigative judgment and to make an atonement for all who are shown to be entitled to its benefits.
In the typical service only those who had come before God with confession and repentance, and whose sins, through the blood of the sin offering, were transferred to the sanctuary, had a part in the service of the Day of Atonement. So in the great day of final atonement and investigative judgment the only cases considered are those of the professed people of God. The judgment of the wicked is a distinct and separate work, and takes place at a later period. (The Great Controversy, 480)
From this passage we can point out the following about the investigative judgment:
1. The judgment happens in the heavenly equivalent of the Holy of Holies, or second compartment of ministry in the sanctuary.
2. The judgment is in the presence of God, and is attended by heavenly angels.
3. The work done is to perform investigative judgment and make atonement for those shown to be entitled by that investigation.
4. Ellen White sees the sin offering as transferring sins to the earthly sanctuary in the type.
5. The only people involved in the service in the earthly type were those who were part of the camp of Israel, the professed people of God. In the same way the investigative judgment in the heavenly sanctuary is seen to deal only with the professed people of God. Or to put it another way, it does not deal with the cases of those who have made no profession of God, or made any semblance of seeking pardon through Him. Their judgment is distinct.
As the books of record are opened in the judgment, the lives of all who have believed on Jesus come in review before God. Beginning with those who first lived upon the earth, our Advocate presents the cases of each successive generation, and closes with the living. Every name is mentioned, every case closely investigated. Names are accepted, names rejected. When any have sins remaining upon the books of record, unrepented of and unforgiven, their names will be blotted out of the book of life, and the record of their good deeds will be erased from the book of God's remembrance. (The Great Controversy, 483)
The following aspects are seen:
1. The books of heaven are reviewed as evidence in the investigative judgment.
2. The lives of all professed believers in God are reviewed, individually.
3. Those who have sins remaining upon the books of record, that are not repented of and forgiven, will be blotted out of the book of life. The record of their good deeds is removed.
With this summary of the Adventist Sanctuary teaching we may now begin to examine whether this doctrine is supported by Scripture.
Does the New Testament book of Hebrews discuss the cleansing of the sanctuary?
The Adventist Sanctuary doctrine asserts that the cleansing of the sanctuary in heaven started in 1844. Does this match up with Scripture? The Day of Atonement type, spelled out in Leviticus, pictures a corporate presentation of blood to make atonement for the sins of the people throughout the year. On this day the high priest would enter the Most Holy Place of the sanctuary to appear before the Lord. He would sprinkle the blood on the mercy seat, above the ark. The following highlights from Leviticus 16 spell out some of the details:
Lev 16:2 and the LORD said to Moses, "Tell Aaron your brother not to come at any time into the Holy Place inside the veil, before the mercy seat that is on the ark, so that he may not die. For I will appear in the cloud over the mercy seat.
This passage tells us that the Lord would appear in the cloud over the mercy seat, which is on the ark. Aaron was not to come just whenever he wanted into that Most Holy Place.
Lev 16:15 "Then he shall kill the goat of the sin offering that is for the people and bring its blood inside the veil and do with its blood as he did with the blood of the bull, sprinkling it over the mercy seat and in front of the mercy seat.
Lev 16:16 Thus he shall make atonement for the Holy Place, because of the uncleannesses of the people of Israel and because of their transgressions, all their sins. And so he shall do for the tent of meeting, which dwells with them in the midst of their uncleannesses.
The high priest brought the blood of the sacrifice and sprinkled it over the mercy seat. He would also cleanse the rest of the sanctuary. By doing so he was making atonement for the Holy Place, which was unclean, due to the sins of the people.
The Day of Atonement, therefore, was a picture of corporate cleansing. All of the sins of the people throughout the year were atoned for on this day. It involved cleansing both the people, and the sanctuary.
Lev 16:17 No one may be in the tent of meeting from the time he enters to make atonement in the Holy Place until he comes out and has made atonement for himself and for his house and for all the assembly of Israel.
Lev 16:33 He shall make atonement for the holy sanctuary, and he shall make atonement for the tent of meeting and for the altar, and he shall make atonement for the priests and for all the people of the assembly.
The book of Hebrews also refers to the corporate cleansing of sin. Is this related to the Day of Atonement? The first reference to corporate cleansing occurs in Chapter 1.
Heb 1:1 Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.
Heb 1:3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
Heb 1:4 having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.
Hebrews 1:3 tells us that Jesus made purification for sins. Having done so He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. This shows both kingly and priestly roles for Christ. He made purification for sins, as High Priest. He sat at God's right hand, as King.
What is clear from the text is that the priestly task of making purification of sins, the corporate provision for all sins, has already occurred before He sits down. This corporate purification certainly recalls the Day of Atonement service with its provision for the whole camp. This verse summarizes Christs activity in completing all of the blood work spelled out in the old testament type. It is described as in the past from the perspective of the author of Hebrews.
This does not mean that Jesus' ministry as High Priest is over. Hebrews 4:16 states "Let us then approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need." We come to Jesus in real time to receive the benefits of His completed sacrifice. He is still our High Priest.
Two other passages in Hebrews 9 use language related to the Day of Atonement.
Heb 9:11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation)
Heb 9:12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.
Jesus' entry into heaven is here described. We can see a number of aspects:
1. Jesus entered as High Priest into the true tabernacle, not made with hands.
2. He entered by means of blood. Blood was not necessary to enter the first compartment of the sanctuary. Blood was required, however, to enter the second compartment. So this entry of Jesus included ministration in the heavenly equivalent of the second compartment.
3. Jesus' blood is said to be superior to that of goats and calves. While there are various sacrifices spelled out in the Old Testament, few involved entry into the sanctuary with blood. The reference to goats and calves reduces further the possibilities for the old testament service being referenced. Specifically, goats blood was only stated to have been brought into the sanctuary on the Day of Atonement.
4. The entry of Jesus with blood secured eternal redemption. This shows the finality of the blood work Jesus performed.
Taken together, these elements allude to the Day of Atonement ministry, performed in the most holy place, by the high priest, who was required to enter with the blood of bulls and goats.
Some Adventists have disputed this, indicating that it is not the Day of Atonement referenced in Hebrews 9:11-12, but rather, the ceremonies surrounding the inauguration of the sanctuary, described in Numbers 7 and Leviticus 8. For instance, Adventist scholar Richard Davidson argues this position in his article Inauguration or Day of Atonement? in Andrews University Seminury Studies, in Spring of 2002.
But the elements in the text point beyond just inauguration. In Hebrews 9:11-12, as mentioned above, Jesus is specifically stated to be the High Priest of the good things that have come. The inauguration service was not associated with the high priest. It was Moses that conducted the inauguration. The High Priest was associated with the Day of Atonement entry with blood, particularly of bulls and goats. Nor did the inauguration service have the results of securing eternal redemption.
But more than just the particulars not matching up, Davidson's claim that the allusion in Hebrews 9:11-12 may be to the inauguration misses the point. The nature of the events described indicate that both the entry for the inauguration, and that of the Day of Atonement, are in view. Jesus is said in vs. 12 to enter "once for all." Just as His sacrifice for sins was once-for-all, and did not require repetition,so his entry was also once-for-all. Just as all the sacrifices in the Old Testament were fulfilled by Jesus' sacrifice, so all the entries with blood were fulfilled by this one entry and presentation.
Jesus died once, at one point in time. He does not need to die again. However, in the type it was not just the death of the sacrifice that was required. Blood had to be ministered by the priest. And we see here Jesus going before God and ministering His completed sacrifice in the presence of His Father. The once-for-all Sacrifice is ministered once-for-all. This ministration resulting in eternal redemption shows its finality. No more ministering of blood is needed. Jesus' one sacrifice has been completed, and presented.
A second passage in Hebrews 9 is even more clear in spelling out the the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary, in fulfillment of the Day of Atonement type:
Heb 9:23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
Heb 9:24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.
Heb 9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own
In this passage we see the following:
1. It was necessary for the earthly sanctuary to be purified. It is necessary for the heavenly realities, of which the earthly were a copy, to be purified with better sacrifices.
2. The fulfillment of this cleansing is then spelled out. Christ has entered into heaven itself, to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.
3. This presentation of Christ before God, where He presents Himself the completed sacrifice for sin, is contrasted with the entry of the high priest on the day of atonement. The high priest had to enter in many times, year after year. However, Jesus entered once and presented Himself before God. His entry needed no yearly repetition.
Just as the earthly high priest would minister blood from the sacrificial animal in God's presence while cleansing the earthly sanctuary, so Jesus ascended to God and ministered His own shed blood, presenting Himself, the completed sacrifice.
This is all described after asserting the necessity of the cleansing of the heavenly things. So we see that Jesus' death and ministration of His blood
- made purification for sin
- secured eternal redemption
- cleansed the heavenly things with better sacrifices
All of this was all done in the first century, in the past from the perspective of the author of the book of Hebrews.
Books or Blood?
In the teaching of the investigative judgment, the cleansing of the heavenly record books involves investigation of the individual cases of all professed believers in God. But does Leviticus 16 describe the investigation of the cases of individuals?
Lev 16:12 And he shall take a censer full of coals of fire from the altar before the LORD, and two handfuls of sweet incense beaten small, and he shall bring it inside the veil
Lev 16:13 and put the incense on the fire before the LORD, that the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy seat that is over the testimony, so that he does not die.
Lev 16:14 And he shall take some of the blood of the bull and sprinkle it with his finger on the front of the mercy seat on the east side, and in front of the mercy seat he shall sprinkle some of the blood with his finger seven times.
Lev 16:15 "Then he shall kill the goat of the sin offering that is for the people and bring its blood inside the veil and do with its blood as he did with the blood of the bull, sprinkling it over the mercy seat and in front of the mercy seat.
Lev 16:16 Thus he shall make atonement for the Holy Place, because of the uncleannesses of the people of Israel and because of their transgressions, all their sins. And so he shall do for the tent of meeting, which dwells with them in the midst of their uncleannesses.
Lev 16:17 No one may be in the tent of meeting from the time he enters to make atonement in the Holy Place until he comes out and has made atonement for himself and for his house and for all the assembly of Israel.
Lev 16:18 Then he shall go out to the altar that is before the LORD and make atonement for it, and shall take some of the blood of the bull and some of the blood of the goat, and put it on the horns of the altar all around.
Lev 16:19 And he shall sprinkle some of the blood on it with his finger seven times, and cleanse it and consecrate it from the uncleannesses of the people of Israel.
Did the text describe the high priest pouring over books in judgment, and scrutinizing the cases of individuals? No. What is described is a sacrifice. The blood of the sacrifice is taken into the presence of God, in the Most Holy Place. In Leviticus 16 the high priest did not open books. No scrutiny of individual cases was made by the high priest in the Most Holy Place at all. Rather, what is seen is a corporate cleansing provision with blood presented for the sins of the whole camp.
And this is what we see Jesus accomplished in the first century. He died on the cross as a once-for-all sacrifice. He then entered once-for-all into the heavenly sanctuary to make purification for sins. Having completed this purification He sat down to reign:
Heb 1:3b After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.
How does a first century cleansing fit the type?
In describing the heavenly sanctuary, the author of Hebrews says that the earthly serves as a shadow and copy of the heavenly things.
Heb 8:5 They serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things. For when Moses was about to erect the tent, he was instructed by God, saying, "See that you make everything according to the pattern that was shown you on the mountain."
Heb 10:1 For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near.
The argument of Hebrews chapter 9 begins by outlining the arrangement of the earthly sanctuary. The rest of the chapter shows how various aspects of the earthly were fulfilled in Christ. In addition to this general correspondence the author will at times argue directly from the earthly type to draw conclusions regarding the heavenly. An example is Hebrews 9:22-23:
Heb 9:22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
Heb 9:23 Thus it is necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
The author argues for the necessity of the cleansing of the heavenly by referring to the services of the earthly. From the above it is clear that the ministry of Christ is seen as a fulfillment of the earthly services, and we should be able to trace these services in the heavenly fulfillment.
Having said that, Jesus' ministry not only fulfills the earthly but surpasses it. It is superior in many ways. In some instances this superior fulfillment reveals things we might not expect from reading the type. Below I list some of these unexpected fulfillments in which Jesus' better ministry results in some surprises:
Jesus made a once-for-all sacrifice
The most familiar of these instances in which Jesus not only fulfilled, but far surpassed, the type is the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ. By Jesus' death He fulfilled all the sacrifices in the earthly. Jesus' one act provided the fulfillment of the sin offerings, peace offerings, the offerings presented in the various appointed times, the offerings made for the inauguration of the sanctuary, those for the ratification of the covenant, etc. He fulfilled all the deaths of all the sacrifices in the whole sanctuary system.
Heb 7:27 He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself.
Heb 10:11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God
This is not what we would expect based on a reading of the type. Yet it is far better! From the type we would expect many sacrifices, repeated over and over. Moreover, we would expect that the sacrifice for a specific rite would occur at the time that rite was conducted. In other words, the blood for the Passover was shed at the time of the Passover in the type. The blood for the Day of Atonement was shed on the Day of Atonement in the type. But in the fulfillment in Christ we have one death in the first century. And none other is needed.
Here are other instances where the fulfillment is better:
Jesus is not a priest after Levi but after the order of Melchizedek
Heb 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing about priests.
Heb 7:15 This becomes even more evident when another priest arises in the likeness of Melchizedek,
Heb 7:16 who has become a priest, not on the basis of a legal requirement concerning bodily descent, but by the power of an indestructible life.
Heb 7:17 For it is witnessed of him, "You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek."
Jesus does not have to offer sacrifices for His own sin as He is sinless
Heb 7:26 For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens.
Heb 7:27 He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself.
Heb 4:15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.
The earthly priest died, but Jesus always lives to make intercession for us
Heb 7:22 This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant.
Heb 7:23 The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office,
Heb 7:24 but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever.
Heb 7:25 Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them.
The inauguration was done by Moses, but Jesus as High Priest, and King, fulfilled the inauguration
The word here translated opened is the word for inauguration.
Heb 10:19 Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus,
Heb 10:20 by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh
Jesus made a once-for-all entry by means of blood.
Just as the sacrifice of Jesus was once for all, Jesus' entry with His own blood is also stated to be once for all:
Heb 9:12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.
From the earthly type we would expect one entry for the inauguration, other entries with blood into the holy place for the sin offering of the whole camp, another entry each year for the Day of Atonement, etc. But Jesus made a once-for-all entry in the first century, fulfilling all the various entries.
So from the above, it is obvious that while there is a relationship between the earthly sanctuary and the heavenly such that the heavenly corresponds to the earthly type, we see that there are some instances in which the heavenly far surpasses the earthly. In these instances we may see something different from what we would expect simply from reading the type. But they are nonetheless important fulfillments.
Richard Davidson, an Adventist scholar who has written on the typology of Hebrews, points out that the author is not just changing things with no warrant. He notes that the author makes careful arguments from the Old Testament to show that modifications to the type were anticipated by the Scriptures themselves.
For instance, in regard to Jesus being Priest after the order of Melchizedek rather than Levi, Davidson notes the author quotes from Psalm 110, where this new priesthood is anticipated:
Psa 110:4 The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind, "You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.
Davidson's views are spelled out in the book Issues in the Book of Hebrews in the article "Relationship Between Type and Antitype in Hebrews".
And in other instances, the New Testament gives a clear description of the fulfillment, explaining Jesus' superior provision. It may not fall into line with what I would picture from my reading of the old testament type. However, it is an inspired description of the true fulfillment. The fulfillment brought about by Jesus is the true, and it is better. The earthly was a shadow based on the heavenly reality, not the reality itself.
My method of approaching the typological relationship then is this: I assume that the earthly will show correlation with the heavenly. In the absence of specific statements in the New Testament regarding the fulfillment, I can make some reasonable conjecture regarding the fulfillment based on the type. However, in doing so I recognize the limitations of this method. My conjectures from the type are not without basis, but neither are they inspired counsel as are the New Testament texts. In specific cases when the New Testament indicates a fulfillment of some aspect of the type, I believe it. I do not object to it based on my perception of the type.
When the New Testament interprets we need look no further. When the New Testament does not explain, we can draw inferences from the type, while keeping in mind our limitations. Being dogmatic in assertions drawn from the type is not advisable. We need to recognize that while Jesus does fulfill, He also surpasses. We need to leave room for that better ministry in our theories based on the type.
The earthly is a copy and shadow of the heavenly, but the heavenly is the true. The shadow will not always perfectly represent the heavenly, though there is a basic correlation.
So when I apply this typology to the texts in Hebrews regarding the Day of Atonement I try to accept what the New Testament texts are saying, even if they challenge what I would initially expect from the type.
There are elements of the Day of Atonement that I see as already fulfilled in the first century. And I contend that Adventists are compelled to agree. The once for all sacrifice of Christ in the first century is the only sacrifice in the new covenant fulfillment. It happened at one point of time, in the first century. It will not be repeated and therefore this essential aspect of the Day of Atonement type happened long before 1844. The death of the sacrifice is a necessary component of the Day of Atonement. You cannot have the Day of Atonement without the sacrifice. It is evident that Adventists see this part of the Day of Atonement fulfilled in the first century, even though it does not match what would be expected from a reading of the type. Why do Adventists accept it? Because the New Testament text says it is true! So should we not apply the same principle to other statements? Not only was the sacrifice of the Day of Atonement service fulfilled, but so was the entry with blood. Jesus ascended into the heavenly sanctuary in the first century, described in the past tense by the author of Hebrews. The entry was once for all:
Heb 9:12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.
So are we not compelled again to see that a portion of the fulfillment happened in the first century? The Day of Atonement entry was an entry through the whole sanctuary. This already happened, once for all.
If Adventists can accept that the sacrifice of the Day of Atonement was fulfilled in the first century based on plain statements by the New Testament text, then why would Adventists think it strange if another element, the once-for-all entry also happened then? These are historical activities that will not be repeated.
And the author of Hebrews also points to a completed purification.
Heb 1:3b After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
Heb 9:23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
Heb 9:24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.
Heb 9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own
The better ministry of Christ is the fulfillment. It goes beyond the earthly. Jesus did not need to repeat the sacrifices again and again, or the entry again and again, and He made purification for sins in the first century.
Part of the difficulty for an Adventist to accept these plain statements is that they have understood the Day of Atonement to be a day of judgment. However, the part that relates mostly clearly to judgment, those being cut off who did not afflict themselves, is yet to be fulfilled. And the parts that happened already, the death, entry and purification, deal not with judgment but with cleansing. They are the provision for the sin of the whole world.
The portion that relates to judgment is future. The judgment is based on what people do with the provision already made. The future judgment hinges on whether people even now respond to the work that Christ has done for them. Now is the time to afflict ourselves. But if we do not do so now, coming to Jesus to receive help in time of need, then we will be cut off later. The judgment is ultimately played out when Jesus comes out of the sanctuary.
Certain elements of the type were fulfilled in historical, non-repeated events. Jesus' death, entry and presentation of blood in the presence of God are completed. Therefore I cannot apply them, in the way that the Seventh-day Adventist investigative judgment doctrine does, to 1844.
Jesus entered the Most Holy Place at His ascension in the first century
One of the key thoughts that gave hope to those Millerites who would eventually form the Seventh-day Adventist church was that in 1844 something happened in fulfillment of Daniel 8:14. Initially they expected this to be the second coming of Jesus. Miller had thought that the sanctuary that was going to be cleansed in Daniel 8:14 was the earth, and that this referenced the cleansing of the earth with fire at the second advent. However, following the great disappointment, when Jesus did not come as they expected, their expectations took a different turn. They still saw meaning in Daniel 8:14, but saw a different fulfillment.
This is illustrated in the well-known story of Hiram Edson. His "fondest hopes" had been dashed when Jesus failed to appear. However, while he and a fellow Millerite had gone to talk to other believers, walking through fields to avoid scoffers so soon after their disappointment, he had an epiphany that would be the focus of the new sanctuary doctrine.
They walked along silently, with bowed heads and meditative hearts, more or less oblivious of each other. Suddenly Edson stopped, as if by a hand laid upon his shoulder. He stood, deep in meditation, his face upturned wistfully toward the mottled gray skies, praying for light. He pondered the Bible evidence on the ministering Priest, Christ Jesus, in God’s antitypical sanctuary in heaven, and how they had expected Him to emerge, on that antitypical Day of Atonement, to bless His waiting people. Edson was waiting for an answer to his perplexity. Suddenly there burst upon his mind the thought that there were two phases to Christ’s ministry in the heaven of heavens, just as in the earthly sanctuary of old. In his own words, an overwhelming conviction came over him-that instead of’ our High Priest coming out of the Most Holy of the heavenly sanctuary to come to this earth on the tenth day of the seventh month, at the end of the 2300 days, he for the first time entered on that day the second apartment of that sanctuary and that he had a work to perform in the Most Holy before coming to this earth.” (Manuscript, Life and Experience, 9, Quoted from The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Volume 1, 884, by LeRoy Edwin Froom.)
Ellen White likewise spoke of the tremendous significance of Jesus entering the Most Holy Place of the sanctuary in 1844.
Sabbath, March 24th, 1849, we had a sweet, and very interesting meeting with the Brethren at Topsham, Me. The Holy Ghost was poured out upon us, and I was taken off in the Spirit to the City of the living God. There I was shown that the commandments of God, and the testimony of Jesus Christ, relating to the shut door, could not be separated, and that the time for the commandments of God to shine out, with all their importance, and for God's people to be tried on the Sabbath truth, was when the door was opened in the Most Holy Place of the Heavenly Sanctuary, where the Ark is, containing the ten commandments. This door was not opened, until the mediation of Jesus was finished in the Holy Place of the Sanctuary in 1844. Then, Jesus rose up, and shut the door in the Holy Place, and opened the door in the Most Holy, and passed within the second vail, where he now stands by the Ark; and where the faith of Israel now reaches. (Review and Herald, August 1, 1849 par. 2)
Most Adventist scholars today do not see this having reference simply to Jesus' physical location in the heavenly sanctuary. Rather they see this as indicating that in 1844 Jesus began to perform Most Holy Place functions.
However, the book of Hebrews indicates that Jesus began to do Most Holy Place work at the time of His ascension, rather than in 1844. There are several evidences that Jesus' ministry in the first century extended to the heavenly equivalent of the second compartment in the earthly sanctuary.
Hebrews chapter 9 begins with a description of the earthly sanctuary. As part of this description of the earthly sanctuary the author points out the limited access of the earthly high priest who could only go into God's presence once per year, on the Day of Atonement:
Heb 9:6 Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.
Heb 9:7 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:
He entered alone, once per year, not without blood. He did not stay. He had to withdraw again until the next year.
This description of the earthly sanctuary, including the Day of Atonement, sets the stage for the argument in the rest of the chapter. The author demonstrates that Jesus' sanctuary ministry surpasses the old covenant sanctuary service. The author's description of the Day of Atonement at the beginning of the chapter clues us in to where his argument will eventually lead. He is building up to the argument that Jesus fulfilled this entry of the high priest once per year.
Beginning in verse 11 we see clear references to the day of atonement.
Heb 9:11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation)
Heb 9:12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.
From these verses we learn:
1. Jesus entered as the High Priest. This is significant because one of the chief roles of the high priest, as opposed to other priests, is the entry on the Day of Atonement into God's presence.
2. Jesus entered by means of blood. Blood was not necessary to enter the first compartment. The priest would minister there without blood. However, for the Day of Atonement entry the high priest never entered without blood:
Heb 9:7 but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people.
Jesus' entry into God's presence by means of blood is therefore a significant piece of evidence that Jesus' ministry extended to the equivalent of the Most Holy Place.
3. Jesus' entry is contrasted with the high priest's entry using blood of goats and calves. While blood of calves would at times go into the holy place, (the sin offering of the whole camp or the anointed priest) we do not see an entry with goats blood except into the most holy place.
4. Jesus' entry by blood secured eternal redemption.
Now that we have reviewed the elements of these verses, let's step back and notice the close parallel of this description of the entry of Jesus in the heavenly sanctuary with the description of the earthly high priest's Day of Atonement entry earlier in the chapter:
Heb 9:7 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:
Compare with:
Heb 9:11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation)
Heb 9:12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.
The author clearly intended Hebrews 9:11-12 to describe the heavenly fulfillment of the earthly type.
Jesus entered once-for-all as the High Priest. He did not have to enter once every year. He entered with His own precious blood, not the blood of animals.
The author is showing how Jesus' ministry surpassed that of even the earthly high priest on the day of atonement.
Now, let's examine the timing. This entrance into the whole sanctuary is clearly seen to be past tense from the perspective of the author of Hebrews. Therefore it happened in the first century, long before 1844.
In Hebrews 9:23-25 we again see clear references to the Day of Atonement. This time we see a specific reference to the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary.
Heb 9:23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
Heb 9:24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.
Heb 9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own
After pointing out that it is necessary for the heavenly things to be cleansed, just as in the earthly sanctuary, the author explains how it happened:
Heb 9:24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.
1. Jesus entered, past tense.
2. This entry was into the true heavenly sanctuary, not the earthly.
3. Jesus entered into God's presence on our behalf.
Verse 25 continues the description of Jesus' entry:
Heb 9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own
1. Jesus entry was not repeated yearly. It happened once.
2. He offered Himself, not blood of animals.
3. Jesus' entry is compared (favorably) to the entry yearly with blood by the high priest, which is the Day of Atonement.
This is a straight-forward fulfilling of the type of the Day of Atonement cleansing. And it was anticipated by the description of the Day of Atonement in the type earlier in the chapter.
Another evidence that Jesus entered the equivalent of the Most Holy Place in the heavenly is seen in the fact that Jesus inaugurated the heavenly sanctuary. The inauguration included all the sanctuary and all its vessels. Speaking of that service in the earthly, in the context of Jesus' blood being better, the author of Hebrews says:
Heb 9:21 And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship.
Jesus inaugurated or consecrated a new and living way to God at His ascension:
Heb 10:20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;
So it is evident that Jesus' entry in first century completed not only Day of Atonement aspects, but also inauguration aspects. This inauguration included the whole sanctuary, extending to the Most Holy Place.
In fact, so great was the ministry of Jesus, and so superior to that of the earthly, that we now have access directly to the throne of grace as well!
Hebrews speaks of this radical difference in access to God in the new covenant. The limited access to God in the old covenant is completely changed with Christ. In the earthly only the high priest could come into God's presence, and then only once per year.
But Jesus sets that on its head. Jesus went into God's presence. However, He did not go in and then immediately go back out, like the earthly high priest. He stayed. In fact He sat down. The sitting of Christ is significant.
Heb 1:3b After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
Heb 10:11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,
Heb 10:13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet.
The sitting of Christ at the right hand of God in Hebrews indicates His status as King.
But more than that, Hebrews uses it to show contrasts with the old covenant system. The priest never sat down in the sanctuary, because his work was not finished. He had to continually offer the same sacrifices, which never really removed sin. But Christ completed the one Sacrifice of Himself, and the one entry, and then sat down, having made purification.
Notice how Hebrews contrasts the standing of the priest daily with Jesus' sitting down:
Heb 10:11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,
Heb 10:13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet.
Jesus completed all of the blood ministration for the purification of sins, then sat down in God's presence.
He also made it possible for us to come before God as well. We can go right into God's presence. We can come boldly to Him to find help in time of need:
Heb 4:16 Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.
Heb 10:19 Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus,
Heb 10:20 by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh,
Heb 10:21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God,
Heb 10:22 let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
All of us can come into God's presence right to the throne which could never happen in the old covenant, with its limited access.
Truly Christ is better!
The throne of grace is parallel to the mercy seat, above which God manifested His presence in the Old Testament. Christ already sat down there, and we can come to Him for grace.
Does blood transfer or does blood cleanse?
The Seventh-day Adventist Sanctuary teaching states that in the old covenant sins were transferred to the sanctuary through sin offerings. The doctrine holds that people confessed sins when presenting the sin offering, but that sins were not at that time forgiven. Rather, they were transferred to the sanctuary. Then on the Day of Atonement sins were finally cleansed once and for all.
Therefore, the goal of sin offerings are to remove sins from the people and transfer them to the sanctuary. Ellen White spells this out in The Great Controversy.
The ministration of the earthly sanctuary consisted of two divisions; the priests ministered daily in the holy place, while once a year the high priest performed a special work of atonement in the most holy, for the cleansing of the sanctuary. Day by day the repentant sinner brought his offering to the door of the tabernacle and, placing his hand upon the victim's head, confessed his sins, thus in figure transferring them from himself to the innocent sacrifice. The animal was then slain. "Without shedding of blood," says the apostle, there is no remission of sin. "The life of the flesh is in the blood." Leviticus 17:11. The broken law of God demanded the life of the transgressor. The blood, representing the forfeited life of the sinner, whose guilt the victim bore, was carried by the priest into the holy place and sprinkled before the veil, behind which was the ark containing the law that the sinner had transgressed. By this ceremony the sin was, through the blood, transferred in figure to the sanctuary. In some cases the blood was not taken into the holy place; but the flesh was then to be eaten by the priest, as Moses directed the sons of Aaron, saying: "God hath given it you to bear the iniquity of the congregation." Leviticus 10:17. Both ceremonies alike symbolized the transfer of the sin from the penitent to the sanctuary. (The Great Controversy, 418)
Ellen White here indicates that the purpose of the sin offering was to remove the sin from the penitent sinner and transfer it to the sanctuary.
Important truths concerning the atonement are taught by the typical service. A substitute was accepted in the sinner's stead; but the sin was not canceled by the blood of the victim. A means was thus provided by which it was transferred to the sanctuary. By the offering of blood the sinner acknowledged the authority of the law, confessed his guilt in transgression, and expressed his desire for pardon through faith in a Redeemer to come; but he was not yet entirely released from the condemnation of the law. (The Great Controversy, 420)
According to Ellen White the sin is not cancelled by the blood of the victim. It is only transferred.
As anciently the sins of the people were by faith placed upon the sin offering and through its blood transferred, in figure, to the earthly sanctuary, so in the new covenant the sins of the repentant are by faith placed upon Christ and transferred, in fact, to the heavenly sanctuary. And as the typical cleansing of the earthly was accomplished by the removal of the sins by which it had been polluted, so the actual cleansing of the heavenly is to be accomplished by the removal, or blotting out, of the sins which are there recorded. But before this can be accomplished, there must be an examination of the books of record to determine who, through repentance of sin and faith in Christ, are entitled to the benefits of His atonement. (Great Controversy, 421)
Ellen White therefore indicates that the sins of those who repent are transferred to the sanctuary in heaven, just as in the earthly she sees the sin offering transferring sin to the earthly sanctuary.
Generally, Adventists argue that there must be transfer of sin to the sanctuary because on the Day of Atonement the sanctuary is cleansed from all the sins of the people. Therefore they infer that these sins were transferred there through confession.
Is it true however, that the sin offering transfers sin to the sanctuary?
Throughout the old and new testament it is clear the blood makes atonement, and brings forgiveness.
Lev 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life.
The life of the sacrificial victim is given, its blood shed to make atonement. It does not say anything about transfer, or the blood bringing atonement by moving the sin to the sanctuary. It does not say the blood contaminates the sanctuary.
In fact, the regulations of the sin offering spell out something quite different:
Lev 6:25 "Speak to Aaron and his sons, saying, This is the law of the sin offering. In the place where the burnt offering is killed shall the sin offering be killed before the LORD; it is most holy.
Lev 6:26 The priest who offers it for sin shall eat it. In a holy place it shall be eaten, in the court of the tent of meeting.
Lev 6:27 Whatever touches its flesh shall be holy, and when any of its blood is splashed on a garment, you shall wash that on which it was splashed in a holy place.
Lev 6:28 And the earthenware vessel in which it is boiled shall be broken. But if it is boiled in a bronze vessel, that shall be scoured and rinsed in water.
Lev 6:29 Every male among the priests may eat of it; it is most holy.
The sin offering is said to be most holy. It is to be eaten in a holy place. If the blood is splashed on a garment you have to wash the garment in a holy place. And anything which touches its flesh shall be holy. In other words, the sin offering is not seen to transfer sin, but to transfer holiness.
Similarly, the guilt offering, which dealt with certain intentional sins (whereas the sin offering was for unintentional sins), was offered in a holy place, and was most holy.
Lev 7:1 “This is the law of the guilt offering. It is most holy.
Lev 7:2 In the place where they kill the burnt offering they shall kill the guilt offering, and its blood shall be thrown against the sides of the altar.
Lev 7:3 And all its fat shall be offered, the fat tail, the fat that covers the entrails,
Lev 7:4 the two kidneys with the fat that is on them at the loins, and the long lobe of the liver that he shall remove with the kidneys.
Lev 7:5 The priest shall burn them on the altar as a food offering to the LORD; it is a guilt offering.
Lev 7:6 Every male among the priests may eat of it. It shall be eaten in a holy place. It is most holy.
Lev 7:7 The guilt offering is just like the sin offering; there is one law for them. The priest who makes atonement with it shall have it.
And why would these offerings not be represented as holy, and conferring holiness? They are a picture of Jesus who died for us, to reconcile us to God. We are justified by His blood. His blood does not contaminate, or merely move sin around.
1Pe 1:17 And if you call on the Father, who without partiality judges according to each one's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear;
1Pe 1:18 knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your futile way of life handed down from your forefathers,
1Pe 1:19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb blameless and spotless.
Rom 5:8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
Rom 5:9 Much more then, having been justified now by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.
Rom 5:10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
Eph 1:7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace.
The result of the sin offering for the individual is not said to be temporary relocation of sin, which does not forgive, as Ellen White indicates. Rather it results in forgiveness.
Lev 4:27 "If anyone of the common people sins unintentionally in doing any one of the things that by the LORD's commandments ought not to be done, and realizes his guilt,
Lev 4:28 or the sin which he has committed is made known to him, he shall bring for his offering a goat, a female without blemish, for his sin which he has committed.
Lev 4:29 And he shall lay his hand on the head of the sin offering and kill the sin offering in the place of burnt offering.
Lev 4:30 And the priest shall take some of its blood with his finger and put it on the horns of the altar of burnt offering and pour out all the rest of its blood at the base of the altar.
Lev 4:31 And all its fat he shall remove, as the fat is removed from the peace offerings, and the priest shall burn it on the altar for a pleasing aroma to the LORD. And the priest shall make atonement for him, and he shall be forgiven.
The sin and guilt offerings were an opportunity for the individual who had sinned to experience contrition, repentence, atonement, and forgiveness, for a single sinful act. The animal died in his place. He had to lay his hand on the sin offering, showing identification with the one who would pay his penalty. He then had to personally kill the sin offering, driving home the cost of forgiveness. The priest would then minister the offering and the result was that the priest made atonement for him and the person was forgiven.
Blood throughout the levitical rites represented the blood of Christ, and the cleansing it would bring. It did not defile, but cleanse. Hebrews reiterates this point as well:
Heb 9:13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh,
Heb 9:14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.
Heb 9:22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
The person offering the animal would place his hand upon the animal. In the same way we identify with Christ, who died for us. We participate in His body and blood:
1Co 10:16 The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?
1Pe 3:18 For Christ also suffered once to atone for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring you to God, being put to death in the flesh, but made alive by the Spirit.
Without a direct text that indicates the sin offerings transfer sins to the sanctuary, the passage that Adventists often lean on to try to show this is Leviticus 10.
Lev 10:17 "Why have you not eaten the sin offering in the place of the sanctuary, since it is a thing most holy and has been given to you that you may bear the iniquity of the congregation, to make atonement for them before the LORD?
Lev 10:18 Behold, its blood was not brought into the inner part of the sanctuary. You certainly ought to have eaten it in the sanctuary, as I commanded."
Adventists argue that sin is transferred to the priest, and then somehow from there to the sanctuary. However, even in this passage the sin offering is used to make atonement. Nowhere does the text say that the priest's ministration of the sin offering transfers sin to the sanctuary. This is assumed by Adventists. They assume transfer to the priest, which then transfers to the sanctuary.
The sin offering is given to the priests as a thing most holy, to bear the iniquity of the congregation. But the end result of that is atonement and forgiveness. The offering takes on the sin and then becomes a holy thing, the symbol of Jesus, the substitute for the sinner. And as we recall the flesh of the sin offering did not transfer sin, but in fact transferred holiness. So even in this text the result is not transfer of sin to the sanctuary, which is never stated. Rather we see atonement is made before the Lord by the sin offering's ministration. The sin offering is called a thing most holy, and is not seen to contaminate anything.
In fact, the reason the priest had not eaten it is that he himself was not clean, and could not then be worthy to partake!
Lev 10:19 And Aaron said to Moses, "Behold, today they have offered their sin offering and their burnt offering before the LORD, and yet such things as these have happened to me! If I had eaten the sin offering today, would the LORD have approved?"
Lev 10:20 And when Moses heard that, he approved.
Moreover, it is not clear in the Adventist system how sins would be transferred to the Most Holy Place by sin offerings, when no sin offering ever went into the Most Holy Place throughout the year. It was only on the Day of Atonement that this happened. So if sin offerings are the vehicle of sin transfer, how did sins get to the Most Holy Place, so that it required cleansing?
Now let's step back and take a look at the overall assertion of the Adventist view. In the Adventist view of the sanctuary system, God instructs sinners to come to the sanctuary to transfer their sins to the sanctuary. The sanctuary, in this view, is a giant holding tank for sins. But this is surely all backwards. When we look at the Scriptures we see that the sanctuary was the place where a Holy God was to dwell among the Israelites. Uncleanness was to be kept from it, not invited in! And sins and impurities were to be atoned for and cleansed, not stored.
In the Garden of Eden Adam and Eve had direct fellowship with God. However, after they sinned they were driven from the garden, and could no longer meet with God in the same way.
Gen 3:23 therefore the LORD God sent him out from the garden of Eden to work the ground from which he was taken.
Gen 3:24 He drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the tree of life.
Later, in the time of Moses, God expressed His desire to dwell among the people. However, this would no longer be face-to-face communion as in the garden. Rather, God chose to dwell among them in the sanctuary.
Exo 25:8 And let them make me a sanctuary, that I may dwell in their midst.
Individual Israelites could not approach God directly whenever they wanted. Rather only the high priest went in, and only once a year, into God's presence. During the time of the wilderness wandering, God did meet with Moses face to face, but did not do so with the rest of the people.
The sanctuary was a means for a holy God to live among an unholy people. Its services were put in place to remove sin and uncleanness from the people. So we constantly see warnings to keep uncleanness away, not to bring it into the sanctuary.
An example of this is the rule regarding lepers:
Num 5:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
Num 5:2 Command the children of Israel, that they put out of the camp every leper, and every one that hath an issue, and whosoever is defiled by the dead:
Num 5:3 Both male and female shall ye put out, without the camp shall ye put them; that they defile not their camps, in the midst whereof I dwell.
Num 5:4 And the children of Israel did so, and put them out without the camp: as the LORD spake unto Moses, so did the children of Israel.
As these people were unclean, they were to be kept from the sanctuary. Uncleanness that could be removed was to be handled at the sanctuary. Uncleanness that could not be removed was to be kept away from God's presence.
Uncleanness was to be kept outside the camp, not close to where God dwelt in the midst of the people.
Lev 12:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
Lev 12:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.
Lev 12:3 And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.
Lev 12:4 And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.
Uncleanness lasted for a set amount of time. Then the person would go to the sanctuary to have it removed.
Lev 12:6 "And when the days of her purifying are completed, whether for a son or for a daughter, she shall bring to the priest at the entrance of the tent of meeting a lamb a year old for a burnt offering, and a pigeon or a turtledove for a sin offering,
Lev 12:7 and he shall offer it before the LORD and make atonement for her. Then she shall be clean from the flow of her blood. This is the law for her who bears a child, either male or female.
Where God dwelled, in the sanctuary, was a holy place. Those who were unclean were not to approach, unless it was in accord with the prescription. And when people would come to the sanctuary, when the time of their uncleaness was over, provision was made through sacrifice not to store the sin, but to remove it. Atonement was made for the unclean person.
This was a general rule regarding uncleanness. It is stated again in regard to regulations for discharges:
Lev 15:31 "Thus you shall keep the people of Israel separate from their uncleanness, lest they die in their uncleanness by defiling my tabernacle that is in their midst."
Failing to be cleansed at the appointed time was a sever offense because it was an affront to the sanctuary. The person was rejecting the provision for cleansing, and their impurity remained.
Num19:13 Anyone who touches a corpse, the body of a man who has died, and does not purify himself, defiles the tabernacle of the LORD; and that person shall be cut off from Israel. Because the water for impurity was not sprinkled on him, he shall be unclean; his uncleanness is still on him.
Not only was impurity to be kept from the camp, but sins defiled the sanctuary. The children of Israel were eventually driven from the land, and the sanctuary destroyed, due to their sins:
Ezekiel 5:5 "Thus says the Lord GOD, 'This is Jerusalem; I have set her at the center of the nations, with lands around her.
6 'But she has rebelled against My ordinances more wickedly than the nations and against My statutes more than the lands which surround her; for they have rejected My ordinances and have not walked in My statutes.'
7 "Therefore, thus says the Lord GOD, 'Because you have more turmoil than the nations which surround you and have not walked in My statutes, nor observed My ordinances, nor observed the ordinances of the nations which surround you,'
8 therefore, thus says the Lord GOD, 'Behold, I, even I, am against you, and I will execute judgments among you in the sight of the nations.
9 'And because of all your abominations, I will do among you what I have not done, and the like of which I will never do again.
10 'Therefore, fathers will eat their sons among you, and sons will eat their fathers; for I will execute judgments on you and scatter all your remnant to every wind.
11 'So as I live,' declares the Lord GOD, 'surely, because you have defiled My sanctuary with all your detestable idols and with all your abominations, therefore I will also withdraw, and My eye will have no pity and I will not spare.
Even in the case of the Day of Atonement it is clear that defilement from sin happens because God's sanctuary is in the midst of a sinful nation:
Lev 16:16 And he shall make an atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins: and so shall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation, that remaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness.
There is no needed mechanism to transfer sins to the sanctuary. Sins defile by their presence. It infused the land, the camp, and the sanctuary in their midst. God lived in the middle of a sinful people. And it was only the sacrifices, which provided atonement by the shed blood, which represented the blood of Christ, that enabled them to approach a holy God.
We can see from all these texts that the sanctuary was the solution to the problem of sin contamination, not the vessel to hold sins. It removed sin through blood atonement. It was not the storage house for such contamination.
Even the names of the different compartments of the sanctuary emphasize that holiness increases as one comes closer into the immediate presence of God. While God, in fact, fills the whole heavens, and manifested His presence throughout the Israelite camp and sanctuary, His immediate presence was above the ark, over the mercy seat.
Ex 25:21 And you shall put the mercy seat on the top of the ark, and in the ark you shall put the testimony that I shall give you.
22 There I will meet with you, and from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim that are on the ark of the testimony, I will speak with you about all that I will give you in commandment for the people of Israel.
Ex 30:6 And you shall put it in front of the veil that is above the ark of the testimony, in front of the mercy seat that is above the testimony, where I will meet with you.
Lev 16:2 And the LORD said to Moses, "Tell Aaron your brother not to come at any time into the Holy Place inside the veil, before the mercy seat that is on the ark, so that he may not die. For I will appear in the cloud over the mercy seat.
Num 7:89 And when Moses went into the tent of meeting to speak with the LORD, he heard the voice speaking to him from above the mercy seat that was on the ark of the testimony, from between the two cherubim; and it spoke to him.
And it was into this area that only the high priest would normally go, once per year. The sanctuary was a place for the Holy God to dwell, not a place to store up sins!
At the sanctuary sins were forgiven so that the impurity could be removed, and the people restored. Hence when the person brought the sin offering they were forgiven, and atonement was made:
Lev 4:31 And all its fat he shall remove, as the fat is removed from the peace offerings, and the priest shall burn it on the altar for a pleasing aroma to the LORD. And the priest shall make atonement for him, and he shall be forgiven.
The blood of the animal represented the blood of Christ. He took on the punishment for our sins, dying in our place. And His holy blood makes cleansing.
1Pe 2:24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.
Once the animal shed its blood for atonement, there was no more contamination. We see in the text the blood was not futile. It brought forgiveness.
Which brings us to a key question, often asked by Adventists: Why did the sanctuary need to be cleansed on the Day of Atonement if individual sins had already been forgiven?
This misses the point, somewhat. Each of the various sacrifices showed different aspects of Jesus' one Sacrifice.
The individual guilt offerings were meant to teach confession, and atonement, for specific sinful acts, by the one who committed the sinful act.
The Day of Atonement sacrifices, on the other hand, were meant to illustrate corporate provision through one sacrifice for all the sins, of all the people. They illustrate different aspects of Jesus' one sacrifice.
Adventists often refer to two "phases" of the sanctuary, with the notion that in the first phase sin is built up, and in the second it is forgiven. They note the first phrase goes on throughout the year, then on the Day of Atonement the second "phase" takes place.
However, the text describing the sin offering says the person is forgiven. It doesn't say they have temporary reprieve through transfer. There is no transfer seen. The sin offering is not part of one "phase". It is its own picture of one work of the aspect of Christ. It was a means for the individual Israelite to learn repentance from a sinful act, and to receive atonement. There were other sacrifices as well, burnt offerings, fellowship offerings, etc. which teach aspects of the sacrifice of Christ.
And in the same way, the sacrifice of the lamb on Passover would teach that the angel of death passed over only because of the blood of the lamb. It pointed back to the experience in Egypt, and forward to the work of Christ. It also revealed something of the timing of Jesus' once-for-all sacrifice. Paul indicates in I Corinthians 5 that Christ our Passover Lamb was slain:
1Co 5:7 Purge out the old leaven, in order that you may be a new batch of dough, since you are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us.
Just as these various sacrifices taught some aspect about the plan of salvation, so the Day of Atonement was not a "phase" but rather a specific ceremony meant to teach lessons about Jesus' one sacrifice.
The Day of Atonement sacrifice, more than any other, showed one death and ministration of blood for the sins of all the people in the camp, for all their sins throughout the year. It cleansed the people and the sanctuary.
This is a fitting picture of what Christ's death would do. It was one sacrifice that paid for all the sins, of all believers, throughout time. Jesus died once. Then He presented Himself in God's presence as High Priest to make purification.
When we try to figure out how the sin which was already forgiven in the individual sacrifice wound up back in the sanctuary on the Day of Atonement, we miss that they are just illustrations of the same truth--the blood cleansed. One was an individual lesson, repeated every time an Israelite sinned, throughout the year. The other was a repeated, yearly, lesson about corporate forgiveness. All of the various sacrifices pointed to different aspects of Jesus' one sacrifice.
Adventists also argue, at times, that Jesus had to have a protracted "daily" phase of ministry in the heavenly sanctuary, just as they see a daily and yearly phase in the earthly. Such a view ignores what the book of Hebrews, through inspiration, says about these daily ministrations.
Heb 7:26 For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens.
Heb 7:27 He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself.
The repeated round of various sacrifices performed by the priests in the earthly showed the weakness of their ministry. Jesus did not need to minister daily, over and over again, various sacrifices. He made, and ministered, one Sacrifice, once-for-all.
Hebrews plainly tells us that these various sacrifices had to be performed every year, but their very repetition points out their inability to really remove sins:
Heb 10:1 For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near.
Heb 10:2 Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins?
Heb 10:3 But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year.
Heb 10:4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
The author of Hebrews notes that there was a reminder of sins every year, and these various rites never truly took away sins. Ultimately, these sacrifices pointed to the one Sacrifice of Christ.
Jesus had no need of a prolonged "daily" ministry, with various sacrifices.
Heb 10:11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,
Heb 10:13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet.
Heb 10:14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.
In this sacrifice, He fulfilled all the various sacrifices in the law, which pointed to different aspects of His saving work.
The Day of Atonement was just another illustration of Jesus' dealing with sin. It showed that He made purification for sins, through one corporate provision.
What about the scapegoat?
If Jesus performed the cleansing of the sanctuary in the first century, what about the scapegoat ritual?
The book of Hebrews shows that Jesus did in fact make purification for sins in the first century, and did fulfill the type of the entry of the high priest with blood. Jesus fulfilled all the blood ministration at His ascension.
However, there is another portion of the Day of Atonement that is not spelled out in Hebrews--the portion of the service dealing with the scapegoat.
Since the scapegoat is not overtly spelled out in any text of the New Testament that I am aware of, I am hesitant to be dogmatic on the question. When the New Testament relates something we can confidently accept it. When it does not then we can certainly make some inference from the type. However, as we have already seen when looking at the fulfillment Hebrews did spell out, we may not always get the full picture just by looking at the earthly type. The type is a shadow, and not the true reality. With that in mind, here are a few thoughts:
The scapegoat portion of the service happened after the high priest left the sanctuary, having offered the blood of the Lord's goat for cleansing. Therefore it may well be that the scapegoat is not spelled out in Hebrews because it had not yet happened, and will not until Jesus leaves the heavenly sanctuary for His second coming. The burden of the author was to point out the superiority of Jesus to the Old Testament rites. He showed this through what Jesus had already accomplished at that time.
If the scapegoat does not occur until Jesus leaves the heavenly sanctuary, it will likely take place at the end (just as the Day of Atonement is near the end of the calendar year for the Israelites), and may involve the final removal of sin.
The cleansing portion of the Day of Atonement happened at Jesus' ascension because of the once-for-all nature of Jesus' sacrifice, entry, and blood presentation. It was never to be repeated. However, the rest of the Day of Atonement may well wind up corresponding to its relative time in the Hebrew calendar, just as the other holy times appear to show correspondence.
Beyond the timing of the fulfillment, it should also be noted that the Lord's goat and the scapegoat are both animals that are without blemish, and suitable to be used as a sin offering. In fact the two together are called a sin offering, and the only distinguishing factor is the where the lot falls.
This makes it likely that it represents another aspect of Jesus' ministry, as did the rest of the sanctuary service. This is especially true when we realize that the scapegoat was used to make atonement.
Leviticus 16:5 And he shall take from the congregation of the people of Israel two male goats for a sin offering, and one ram for a burnt offering. 6 “Aaron shall offer the bull as a sin offering for himself and shall make atonement for himself and for his house. 7 Then he shall take the two goats and set them before the Lord at the entrance of the tent of meeting. 8 And Aaron shall cast lots over the two goats, one lot for the Lord and the other lot for Azazel. 9 And Aaron shall present the goat on which the lot fell for the Lord and use it as a sin offering, 10 but the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the Lord to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Azazel.
Verse 5 indicates that, both the Lord's goat, and the goat for azazel, are for a sin offering. The two goats were both interchangeable. Only unblemished, sacrificial animals were used as sin offerings.
Verse 10 specifically says that atonement is made over the live goat:
Verse 20 further shows the process:
Leviticus 16:20 “And when he has made an end of atoning for the Holy Place and the tent of meeting and the altar, he shall present the live goat. 21 And Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over it all the iniquities of the people of Israel, and all their transgressions, all their sins. And he shall put them on the head of the goat and send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a man who is in readiness. 22 The goat shall bear all their iniquities on itself to a remote area, and he shall let the goat go free in the wilderness.
The two goats show different aspects of atonement.
We see something similar in Leviticus 14, in offerings for the person who has leprosy.
Lev 14:4 the priest shall command them to take for him who is to be cleansed two live clean birds and cedarwood and scarlet yarn and hyssop.
Lev 14:5 And the priest shall command them to kill one of the birds in an earthenware vessel over fresh water.
Lev 14:6 He shall take the live bird with the cedarwood and the scarlet yarn and the hyssop, and dip them and the live bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the fresh water.
Lev 14:7 And he shall sprinkle it seven times on him who is to be cleansed of the leprous disease. Then he shall pronounce him clean and shall let the living bird go into the open field.
Both birds are used in the cleansing ceremony. One is killed and one released alive. Multiple animals were used to illustrate multiple aspects of meaning.
In the same way, the two goats appear to show different aspects of atonement in Leviticus 16. The goat for the Lord makes blood atonement for the sins, and the live goat has the sins of the people confessed over it and is sent to the wilderness, showing the sins being removed completely from the camp, away from the people.
The live goat is said to be for azazel. The meaning of this term is debated. Multiple views have been proposed, based on different possible etymologies.
Regardless of which is intended, the result is the same--removal of sin from the people, from the camp. The high priest confesses the sins on the live goat which is sent away from the people, into the wilderness.
The scapegoat shows another aspect of atonement. God removes all sin from His people:
Psalm 103:10 He has not dealt with us according to our sins,
Nor punished us according to our iniquities.
11 For as the heavens are high above the earth,
So great is His mercy toward those who fear Him;
12 As far as the east is from the west,
So far has He removed our transgressions from us.
For this reason I think that the scapegoat ritual prefigures in some way the removal of the sins from the people of God by Jesus. This may refer to Jesus' bearing sins fore removal while on the cross, as referenced in Peter.
1Pe 2:24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.
The transfer of sin is only specifically stated in the old testament type in the scapegoat ritual, where the sins are confessed over the head of the live goat, that them removes them. Jesus here is said to have born sins for removal.
Or the scapegoat could perhaps refer to final removal of sin from the world and His people in the future, after Jesus leaves the heavenly sanctuary, and removes all sin and sinners. However, since the New Testament does not spell out the details, we cannot be too specific.
The context problem of Daniel chapter 8
At the center of the Seventh-day Adventist sanctuary teaching, is the reference to the cleansing of the sanctuary in Daniel 8:14.
Dan 8:14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
In this text Adventists see a clear reference to the Day of Atonement cleansing of the sins of professed people of God. And it is from this prophecy that they derive the year 1844 as the beginning of this Day of Atonement ministry.
However, throughout the history of the Adventist church, many of those who preached this sanctuary teaching have come to question the Adventist interpretation of Daniel 8:14. Or more to the point, they have found that, when looked at in context, Daniel 8:14 is not speaking about a Day of Atonement cleansing at all! When the context of the passage is examined, one realizes that the focus is not on a judgment of individuals in fulfillment of the Day of Atonement type.
Here is the context leading up to Daniel 8:14:
Dan 8:1 In the third year of the reign of king Belshazzar a vision appeared unto me, even unto me Daniel, after that which appeared unto me at the first.
Dan 8:2 And I saw in a vision; and it came to pass, when I saw, that I was at Shushan in the palace, which is in the province of Elam; and I saw in a vision, and I was by the river of Ulai.
Dan 8:3 Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last.
Dan 8:4 I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; so that no beasts might stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will, and became great.
Dan 8:5 And as I was considering, behold, an he goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.
Dan 8:6 And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing before the river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power.
Dan 8:7 And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.
Dan 8:8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.
This part of the vision is explained later by Gabriel. He indicates that the ram represents the Medes and Persians, and the he goat represents the Macedonian-Greecian empire. From history we recognize the great horn as Alexander the great, the Macedonian conqueror. After his fall his kingdom was split up. Here is the explanation:
Dan 8:20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
Dan 8:21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
Dan 8:22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.
After Daniel 8:8 the theme turns from the Medes and Persians and Greecian empires to the activities of a different power--the little horn.
The identity of the little horn is debated among various scholars. For now it doesn't even matter who that little horn power is. For the sake of argument we can even say it represents Rome, in its pagan and papal phases, as a number of Adventists believe.
Here is what the chapter says about that little horn power:
Dan 8:9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.
Dan 8:10 And it waxed 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.
Dan 8:11 Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.
Dan 8:12 And an host was given him against the daily by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised, and prospered.
Again, the particulars of this passage have been debated. What is clear however, is that this little horn power is acting against God's sanctuary, causing the continual, or daily, ministration to be taken away. With that background in mind Daniel 8:13 asks an important question. And Daniel 8:14, our key text, is the answer to that question.
Dan 8:13 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, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?
In other words, how long until the activities of the little horn power against God's sanctuary are stopped? How long will it go on?
Now note that Daniel 14 is not speaking at all about the sins of God's people stored in the sanctuary. It is answering the question regarding the activities of the little horn power.
Dan 8:14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
The sanctuary will be cleansed from what? From the activities of the little horn power! The whole chapter is about the little horn, not about the sins of God's people.
This fact was essentially admitted in the October 1980 special edition of Ministry magazine. (For those not aware, Ministry magazine is a publication of the Seventh-day Adventist church written for Adventist and non-Adventist clergy).
This special edition included the documents from the Glacier View trial, of the ideas of Desmond Ford. Ford was an Adventist minister and teacher who had questioned aspects of the Seventh-day Adventist sanctuary teaching.
The denominational scholars and administrative leaders gathered together to re-examine the sanctuary doctrine, and Ford's objections to it. You can read the entire issue online in Ministry magazine's archives.
Part of this issue is the official report entitled "Christ in the Heavenly Sanctuary."
It contains the following fascinating statement:
According to many older versions of the Bible, at the end of the 2300 days the sanctuary is to be "cleansed." The Hebrew word here is nisdaq, which has a broad range of possible meanings. Its basic idea is "make right," "justify," "vindicate," or "restore"; but "purify" and "cleanse" may be included within its conceptual range. In Daniel 8:14 it is evident that the word denotes the reversal of the evil caused by the power symbolized by the "little horn," and hence probably should be translated "restore." While there is, therefore, not a strong verbal link between this verse and the Day of Atonement ritual of Leviticus 16, the passages are, nevertheless, related by their parallel ideas of rectifying the sanctuary from the effects of sin.
So here, some of the foremost scholars in the Adventist church admit that , in Daniel 8, the sanctuary restoration is from the activities of the little horn power. The "cleansing" or restoration is a specific one, with regard to the defilement caused by the little horn. It is not an investigation of all professed believers of God to see if they have repented. That notion is completely foreign to the context.
They even specify that there is no "strong verbal link" in the terminology to the Day of Atonement ritual. In other words, the term translated cleanse is not directly tied to the Day of Atonement service. They note that cleansing the sanctuary from the defilement of the little horn, and cleansing it from sin on the Day of Atonement are parallel ideas, as both relate to rectifying the sanctuary from the effects of sin. But that is where the similarities stop. The blood of Jesus cleansing the sanctuary by atonement is not the same as removing defiling elements brought in by the little horn power. There is no basis for concluding that the verse is speaking of the Day of Atonement based on the context.
Some, however, argue that there are allusions to the Day of Atonement in the elements of the vision itself. In other words, they contend that the animals referenced--the ram and the goat--point to the Day of Atonement service.
It is true that goats certainly play a key role in the service:
Lev 16:7 Then he shall take the two goats and set them before the LORD at the entrance of the tent of meeting.
Lev 16:8 And Aaron shall cast lots over the two goats, one lot for the LORD and the other lot for Azazel.
Lev 16:9 And Aaron shall present the goat on which the lot fell for the LORD and use it as a sin offering,
Lev 16:10 but the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the LORD to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Azazel.
And it is likewise true that a Ram plays a part in the service:
Lev 16:3 But in this way Aaron shall come into the Holy Place: with a bull from the herd for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering.
However, reference to similar animals are not enough to show the Day of Atonement is indicated when the rest of the passage is speaking of something totally different. And while there are references to a ram and to goats in the Day of Atonement service, there is another scriptural parallel involving rams and goats that is even closer.
In the time of Hezekiah the sanctuary had to be cleansed from defiling influences. This was not a Day of Atonement cleansing, but cleansing from outside defilement.
2Ch 29:3 He in the first year of his reign, in the first month, opened the doors of the house of the LORD, and repaired them.
2Ch 29:4 And he brought in the priests and the Levites, and gathered them together into the east street,
2Ch 29:5 And said unto them, Hear me, ye Levites, sanctify now yourselves, and sanctify the house of the LORD God of your fathers, and carry forth the filthiness out of the holy place.
2Ch 29:6 For our fathers have trespassed, and done that which was evil in the eyes of the LORD our God, and have forsaken him, and have turned away their faces from the habitation of the LORD, and turned their backs.
2Ch 29:7 Also they have shut up the doors of the porch, and put out the lamps, and have not burned incense nor offered burnt offerings in the holy place unto the God of Israel.
Further description of this cleansing is given later in the chapter:
2Ch 29:16 And the priests went into the inner part of the house of the LORD, to cleanse it, and brought out all the uncleanness that they found in the temple of the LORD into the court of the house of the LORD. And the Levites took it, to carry it out abroad into the brook Kidron.
2Ch 29:17 Now they began on the first day of the first month to sanctify, and on the eighth day of the month came they to the porch of the LORD: so they sanctified the house of the LORD in eight days; and in the sixteenth day of the first month they made an end.
2Ch 29:18 Then they went in to Hezekiah the king, and said, We have cleansed all the house of the LORD, and the altar of burnt offering, with all the vessels thereof, and the shewbread table, with all the vessels thereof.
2Ch 29:19 Moreover all the vessels, which king Ahaz in his reign did cast away in his transgression, have we prepared and sanctified, and, behold, they are before the altar of the LORD.
As part of this cleansing there was a sin offering presented. It included seven rams and seven goats.
2Ch 29:21 And they brought seven bullocks, and seven rams, and seven lambs, and seven he goats, for a sin offering for the kingdom, and for the sanctuary, and for Judah. And he commanded the priests the sons of Aaron to offer them on the altar of the LORD.
This passage describes the restoration of the temple after a time where it had been abandoned, and foreign items had been placed in it to pollute it. These were likely idols.
This cleansing from outside influences is a much closer parallel to the context of Daniel 8, and the animals involved--rams and goats--play a larger role in this service. So we cannot conclude merely from the animals used in the vision that Daniel 8 is speaking of the Day of Atonement cleansing.
In summary, the context does not fit with the Day of Atonement in Daniel 8. Rather, the passage is discussing the restoration of the sanctuary from the defilement of the little horn power.
An in-depth look at Hebrews 9:23-25
The clearest passage describing the fulfillment of the Day of Atonement cleansing is Hebrews 9:23-25. This is the one New Testament passage that overtly discusses the cleansing of the heavenly things.
Heb 9:23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
This verse asserts that cleansing of the heavenly things is necessary. Some translations of the verse, such as the English Standard Version above, give a past-tense timing to this verse, but verse 23 has no timing of its own. It merely states the necessity of cleansing based on the earthly type.
Richard Davidson, Adventist Old Testament scholar, spells out the lack of specified timing in 9:23:
Note that in Heb 9:23, the word anagkē "necessity" is a noun, and katharizesthai "to be cleansed" is an infinitive. Neither of these terms give an indication of time--past, present, or future.
(“Christ's Entry 'Within the Veil' in Hebrews 6:19-20: The Old Testament Background” Andrews University Seminary Studies, Autumn 2001, 186)
Because of the fact that the verse itself has no timing, some Adventists have suggested that the author is merely hinting at a future Day of Atonement cleansing without spelling out any details. This cleansing would begin in 1844, in the Adventist view.
While the verse itself has no timing, it is directly linked to verses, logically and grammatically, that do have a stated timing. Those verses we can place squarely in the past from the perspective of the author of the book of Hebrews.
In examining the argument of the author in this section, we need to pay careful attention to the connecting words used. They indicate the relation of one section to the next. We see, for instance, that in Hebrews 9:23 the verse is tied to the preceding verse by the term translated in English thus. The word in Greek is ouv.
Heb 9:23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
Heb 9:23 ᾿Ανάγκη οὖν τὰ μὲν ὑποδείγματα τῶν ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς τούτοις καθαρίζεσθαι, αὐτὰ δὲ τὰ ἐπουράνια κρείττοσι θυσίαις παρὰ ταύτας.
This term shows that the statement of the necessity of the cleansing of the heavenly things in verse 23 flows from the thought of verse 22. What was the argument of verse 22?
Heb 9:22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
Verse 22 is the culmination of the argument of chapter 9 to this point. It states a principle which links together all the various cleansing rites with blood. Blood was necessary for forgiveness, and everything is purified with blood.
In the Daniel and Revelation Committee Series volume on Hebrews, Adventist scholar William Johnsson describes the importance of verse 22 in this way:
Many exegetes of Hebrews have seen in this verse the so-called "blood rule," a critical plank in the author's argument. It clearly looks far wider than inauguration, since it is dealing with aphesis, ("release," "pardon"). Verse 22, in fact, is summing up the role of blood in the OT. It is reaching back beyond verse 18 to embrace verses 1-21. ("Defilement/Purification and Hebrews 9:23," 96)
It is with this in mind that verse 23 says that the cleansing of the sanctuary is thus necessary. The cleansing of verse 23 is a cleansing to deal with sin and to provide for forgiveness.
Verse 23 is related not only to the discussion before it, but also to the arguments after it. Again we see another important connecting word showing that the fulfillment of the cleansing is now being spoken of:
Heb 9:23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
Heb 9:24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.
The word rendered for here in verse 24 is γαρ and connects verse 23 to the argument of 24-25, which deals with Christ's entry into God's presence. It is a term used when drawing a conclusion from a preceding argument. Therefore, the necessity of the cleansing of the heavenly things, is directly tied to, and explained through, the statements in verse 24. Verse 24 shows Jesus' past-tense entry directly into God's presence.
Verse 24 spells out a couple of things about Jesus' entry:
1. Christ has entered not into the holy places made with hands. (The earthly tabernacle).
2. Christ has entered into the true--heaven itself--to appear in God's presence on our behalf.
Verse 25 continues speaking about this entry, which is part of the argument for the cleansing of the heavenly things.
Again we see an important connecting word, ουδε, which has the idea nor, or, nor yet.
Heb 9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own
Heb 9:25 οὐδ᾿ ἵνα πολλάκις προσφέρῃ ἑαυτόν, ὥσπερ ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς εἰσέρχεται εἰς τὰ ἅγια κατ᾿ ἐνιαυτὸν ἐν αἵματι ἀλλοτρίῳ
Verse 24 started with a negative statement: Christ entered not. . . .
Verse 25 continues with another negative statement regarding Christ's entry:
Nor yet . . .
In verse 25 we have not only the connecting word ουδε but also a clause that indicates purpose. It uses the word ινα, which means in order that. So we can translate the first part of verse 25 something like this:
Nor yet was it in order that. . . .
Nor yet refers to the entry into God's presence spoken of in verse 24. Jesus did not enter in the the earthly sanctuary made with hands. Nor yet did He enter in order that He might offer Himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own.
The words for nor yet and in order that, which begin the verse, can refer only back to the event of entry and presentation in God's presence of verse 24. So we see that verse 25 still describes aspects of Jesus' entry.
The following Bible versions recognize this connection to the entry in verse v. 24 and add the word enter to vs. 25 to clarify that it has reference to the entry of Christ in verse 24:
Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. (New International Version)
Nor did He [enter into the heavenly sanctuary to] offer Himself regularly again and again, as the high priest enters the [Holy of] Holies every year with blood not his own.
(Amplified Bible)
And he did not enter heaven to offer himself again and again, like the high priest here on earth who enters the Most Holy Place year after year with the blood of an animal.
(New Living Translation)
The following commentaries, which look particularly at the Greek text, recognize the significance of this combination of ουδε and ινα:
The New International Greek Testament Commentary recognizes that the author's phrase nor yet in order that is tied to the main clause in verse 24, for He has not entered:
The author writes ουδ ινα rather than ουχ ινα because the main clause (ου γαρ...εισηλθεν) is expressed negatively.
The Interpretation: The Epistle to the Hebrews
ου and now ουδε: Christ did "not...nor," etc. Christ did not enter into a mere earthly sanctuary; nor (did he enter heaven) in order to be offering himself often like as the high priest enters into the sanctuary year by year
Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, by Franz Delitsch
V. 25 Nor yet (is he entered in) that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy of holies year by year with alien blood.
Expositor’s Bible Commentary
“Nor” carries on the negative at the beginning of v.24: Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary…nor did he…offer himself again and again.” Where there is nothing in the Greek corresponding to NIV’s “did he enter heaven,” the words seem required.
The Expositor’s Greek Testament
“Nor yet [did he enter in] in order to offer Himself repeatedly,” that is, He did not enter in for a brief stay from which He was to return to renew His sacrifice.
Vincet's Word Studies
Nor yet that (οὐ δ' ἵνα)
Supply did he enter. “Nor yet did he enter that he might offer,” etc.
The entry, then, of verse 24 is still being spoken of in verse 25. And the argument, in regard to the necessity of the cleansing of the heavenly things, is still being explained.
From examining the argument of the author in vss. 23-25 we realize that the statement in vs. 23, regarding the necessity of the cleansing of the heavenly things, is not just an isolated, timeless, statement that is mentioned but not elaborated upon. Rather, verse 23 introduces the author’s description of the fulfillment of the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary. This fulfillment involves Jesus’ entry into God’s presence, on our behalf. This entry is compared to the yearly entry of the high priest, every year, with blood not his own. This description is a clear reference to the Day of Atonement entry of the high priest to cleanse the earthly sanctuary.
A number of Adventist scholars have recognized that verse 25 refers to the Day of Atonement service. Below are some quotations from Adventist sources that recognize day of atonement references in Hebrews, and especially Hebrews 9:25.
Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary on Hebrews 10:1:
Compare ch. 9:25, 26, where the work of Christ is again contrasted with that of the earthly high priest on the Day of Atonement.
M.L. Andreasen in The Book of Hebrews:
On Hebrews 4:16
Verse 16. "The throne of grace." This expression in Christian terminology has always been closely connected with prayer, and hence with the mercy seat. It was at the mercy seat the high priest supplicated God for forgiveness on the Day of Atonement. We are invited to come there to find grace to help in time of need. (64)
On Hebrews 9:25-26
Verses 25, 26. The priests entered the first apartment daily, the high priest once every year when he went into the most holy with the blood of the bullock and the goat. (127)
William Johnsson in his essay "Day of Atonement Allusions," which can be found in the DARCOM volume on Hebrews, lists 9:25 as clearly alluding to the Day of Atonement.
The context clearly points to a Day of Atonement allusion (high priest . . . yearly . . . blood [cf. 9:7]) (113)
Alwyn Salom in his appendix article in the Daniel and Revelation committee series on Hebrews, speaking of verse 24, 25:
The reference in the context of the Day of Atonement service of the earthly high priest is not to the outer compartment of the sanctuary. (227)
Richard Davidson, notes that vs. 25 is an unmistakable reference to the Day of Atonement:
I agree with Young that Hebrews 9:7 and 9:25 refer to Day of Atonement, because of the clear references to “once a year” and “every year” respectively. ("Inauguration or Day of Atonement?" Andrews University Seminary Studies, Spring 2002, 79)
Felix Cortez states in his article "From the Holy to the Most Holy Place: The Period of Hebrews 9:6-10 and the Day of Atonement as a Metaphor of Transition" in the Journal of Biblical Literature, 125.3, Fall 2006, 527 (footnote):
Unchallenged references to the Day of Atonement in the central section include 9:7, 25
Despite recognizing these allusions to the Day of Atonement, the above authors largely find ways to avoid the conclusion that Jesus completed the sacrifice, entry and purification that Hebrews speaks of in the past tense. Their means for doing so do not always agree. But they, in general, agree that Jesus did not complete that part of the service. Yet the very texts that they admit are Day of Atonement references are set in the past, and seen as fulfilled.
Vss. 24-25, describing Jesus’ entry into God’s presence, is clearly in the past tense, which indicates that the cleansing of the sanctuary happened prior to the writing of the book of Hebrews. To get around this implication, Adventist scholars say that verse 25 is referring, not to the work of Christ at His entry into God’s presence, but to Jesus’ death on earth. If Adventist scholars admit that Jesus’ past-tense activity in vss. 24-25 is the fulfillment of the entry and work of the high priest on the Day of Atonement, then the entire 1844 doctrine collapses. To admit such would be to admit that Jesus cleansed the heavenly sanctuary in the first century.
Notice how Richard Davidson attempts to deal with this problem of a clear Day of Atonement reference when discussing verse 25:
The contrast is drawn between Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice of himself and the high priest’s entering the sanctuary “often”--every year at the time of the Day of Atonement--“with the blood of another.” (“Christ's Entry 'Within the Veil' in Hebrews 6:19-20: The Old Testament Backround” Andrews University Seminary Studies, Autumn 2001, 187)
By making Jesus’ activity in verse 25 refer back to His death, rather than to His entry into heaven, Davidson can avoid the implication that the Day of Atonement cleansing was fulfilled.
The key to determining whether verse 25 refers only to Jesus' death is the meaning of the phrase offer Himself.
Heb 9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own
Heb 9:25 οὐδ᾿ ἵνα πολλάκις προσφέρῃ ἑαυτόν, ὥσπερ ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς εἰσέρχεται εἰς τὰ ἅγια κατ᾿ ἐνιαυτὸν ἐν αἵματι ἀλλοτρίῳ
Some interpreters, such as Davidson above, have understood the phrase offer Himself, in verse 25, to refer to Jesus' death. It is true that the sacrificial death is often called an offering to God, and the term is used this way in Hebrews to speak of Jesus' death as an offering.
However, in verse 25, Jesus' offering of Himself happens as part of His entrance into God's presence. The offering then is not speaking of the death but of the presentation before the Father. The death did not happen in the sanctuary, as part of the entrance, but on the earth, on the cross. The word translated offer here means present or offer or bring.
Verse 25 is speaking about Jesus' presentation of Himself in God's presence. In the earthly type of the Day of Atonement, as part of the cleansing of the heavenly things, the earthly high priest would kill the sacrificial animals. He would enter the sanctuary and go directly into God's presence. He would bring blood with him and would sprinkle the blood on the mercy seat of the ark. We see this described in Hebrews 9:7:
Heb 9:6 These preparations having thus been made, the priests go regularly into the first section, performing their ritual duties,
Heb 9:7 but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people.
What we see in Hebrews 9:24-25 is the fulfillment of this entry with blood into God's presence. Jesus' offering of Himself here is the author's way of of showing the presentation of the blood on the Day of Atonement.
The evidence for this view is described below:
Evidence 1: The term that is used for offer in Hebrews 9:25 is the term that is used in 9:7 when describing the sprinkling of blood in the earthly Day of Atonement:
Heb 9:7 but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people.
This was noted by Adventist scholar Felix Cortez in a footnote on page 25 of his dissertation The Anchor of the Soul that Enters 'Within the Veil': The Ascension of the 'Son' in the Letter to the Hebrews:
Interestingly, Hebrews departs from the language of the LXX to describe the manipulation of blood by the High Priest on the Day of Atonement: the blood is not “sprinkled” on the sanctuary but “offered” (9:7).
The author in 9:7 uses an unusual term to describe the Day of Atonement ministration of blood in the earthly sanctuary. The blood in the Day of Atonement type was sprinkled. Instead of sprinkling, the author of Hebrews describes it as presentation of blood. This anticipates the fulfillment, in which Christ enters God's presence (9:24) and offers Himself (9:25), just as the earthly high priest offered the blood on the Day of Atonement in God's presence, according to the author in vs. 7.
Heb 9:7 but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people.
Heb 9:24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.
Heb 9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own
Jesus did not sprinkle Himself in heaven, but He presented Himself. His shed blood had long since dried after the cross. But He rose again and presented His blood in the form of a living, completed sacrifice. He presents Himself in God's presence.
Evidence 2: Jesus' offering of Himself is compared to the entry of the earthly high priest, not the killing of the animal by the high priest.
Heb 9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own,
The blood is already shed and the priest is entering in verse 25. This is not a reference to the death of the animal.
As we already saw, the phrase, nor yet in order that, indicates that verse 25 is about the entry into God's presence, continuing the thought of verse 24. It makes no sense to say, Nor yet did He enter in order that He might offer Himself in death repeatedly. The death did not happen at the entry but on earth. The term offer here indicates the offering of Himself in God's presence. And that did happen at the time of the entry.
This offering in heaven fits the type under discussion, the cleansing of the heavenly things, which was accomplished by blood presentation in God's presence on the Day of Atonement.
Evidence 3: If we take Jesus' offering of Himself in verse 25 to be death, then it does not make sense of the whole argument in verses 25 and 26.
Heb 9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own,
Heb 9:26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
The argument the author is making in verse 26 is that, if Jesus were to offer Himself in heaven before God often, He would also have to suffer (death) often. The ministration of the blood followed the death of the victim.
But this argument, that for Jesus to present Himself often in heaven would require Him to suffer often, is lost if both offer and suffer mean death. If both offer and suffer refer to death, then the argument of the two verses would be:
Nor yet was it to die often . . . for then he would have had to die often.
The statement would be redundant.
Instead, what we see in vs. 24 and 25, in direct answer to the necessity of the cleansing of the heavenly things, is an entrance into God's presence. There Jesus fulfilled the offering of the blood by the earthly high priest on the Day of Atonement. Jesus died once for all, entered once for all, and then presented Himself in God's presence not often, but once for all. Jesus is living. He did not present His blood in a bowl, but in His person.
So the argument of verse 23, that it is necessary for the heavenly things to be cleansed by better sacrifices, has now been spelled out. It is through Jesus' past-tense, once-for-all death, once-for-all entry, and offering of Himself in God's presence, not often, but once, that the heavenly things are cleansed. Jesus made purification for sins. He provided the corporate means of forgiveness. He fulfilled the Day of Atonement type of cleansing in the sanctuary. And this was described in past tense terms in the first century.
Here are a number of commentaries which discuss this presentation of Jesus in God's presence:
Commentary on the New Testament by D. D. Whedon
This offer is parallel to the entereth of the high priest; it, therefore does not here mean to sacrifice himself, but to present himself in heaven, as the high priest presented himself in the holy place. Yet in both cases a previous sacrifice takes place.
The Expositor’s Greek Testament
“Nor yet [did he enter in] in order to offer Himself repeatedly,” that is, He did not enter in for a brief stay from which He was to return to renew His sacrifice. Westcott holds that the “offering” corresponds with the offering of the victim upon the altar, not with the bringing of the blood into the Holy of Holies. He refers to v. 14, εαυτον προσηνεγκεν, to ver. 28, and also to x. 10. Similarly Weiss and others. But in ix. 7 προσφερει distinctly refers to the bringing in and application of the blood in the Holy of Holies, and the context of the present passage seems decidedly to make for the same interpretation. The sequence of the ινα clause after εισηλθεν; the analogy presented in the clause under ωσπερ; and the consequences stated under επει (ver. 26) all combine in favouring this meaning. The high priest enters the Holiest annually, but Christ’s entering in was of another kind, not requiring repetition.
Vincet's Word Studies
Offer himself refers rather to Christ's entrance into the heavenly sanctuary and presentation of himself before God, than to his offering on the cross. . . The sacrifice on the cross is described by παθειν suffer, Heb 9:26, and is introduced as a distinct thought. The point is that, being once in the heavenly sanctuary, Christ was not compelled to renew often his presentation of himself there, since, in that case, it would be necessary for him to suffer often. Each separate offering would necessitate a corresponding suffering.
New International Commentary on the New Testament
Moreover, when Christ entered into the heavenly sanctuary, he entered once for all. His entrance into the presence of God on his people's behalf, by virtue of his own blood, is set in sharp contrast to the entrance of Israel's high priest into the material holy of holies on the Day of Atonement.
Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews by Franz Delitsch
V. 25 Nor yet (is he entered in) that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy of holies year by year with alien blood.
The comparison is between the offering of the Jewish high priest within the veil, and that of Christ in the eternal sanctuary: the προσφερειν εαυτον here spoken of cannot therefore be ...the self-sacrifice of Christ upon earth, but a self-presentation subsequent to that. The Jewish high priest goes year by year into the typical sanctuary, εν...αιματι αλλοτριω, i.e. to offer there the blood of a sacrifice which is not himself. Not so with Christ. He is gone into the heavenly sanctuary once for all, not to offer Himself first now, and then again some time hence, and again afterwards, and so on in perpetual succession.
On verse 26:
An of-repeated self-oblation (πολλακις προσφερειν εαυτον) would have been impossible without an oft-repeated suffering of death (πολλακισ παθειν).
The Epistle to the Hebrews: The First Apology for Christianity, An Exegetical Study, by Alexander Balmain Bruce
These verses (25-28) may be paraphrased thus: Christ has entered into the heavenly sanctuary to appear in the presence of God for us, and to abide there, herein differing from the Levitical high priest, who went into the most holy place and came out and went in again, repeating the process year by year, and making many appearances before God, with the blood of fresh sacrifices. Christ presents Himself before God once for all, remaining in the celestial sanctuary, and not going out and coming in again and again. It must be so; any other state of things would involve an absurdity. If Christ were to go in and come out, go in and come out, again and again, that would imply His dying over and over again; for the object of the repeated self-presentations in the presence of God on the part of the Jewish high priest was to offer the blood of new victims; but as Christ’s sacrifice was Himself, each new self-presentation would in His case imply a previous repetition of His passion. He must often on that supposition have suffered death since the foundation of the world.
The Greek Testament, on vs. 26, in reference to 25 and 26 and the argument therein:
This παθειν is here not equivalent to that προσφερειν, but is emphatically placed as a new necessity, involved in that; the πολλακις being common to both: the πολλακις προσφερειν necessitated the πολλακις παθειν. If Christ’s view in entering heaven was to offer, present, himself often to God, then, as a condition of that frequent presentation, there would be an antecedent necessity for Him to suffer often: because that self-presentation is in fact the bringing in before God of the Blood of that his suffering: and if the one was to be renewed, so must the other be likewise.
Jamieson Faussett Brown
Construe, "Nor yet did He enter for this purpose that He may offer Himself often," that is, "present Himself in the presence of God, as the high priest does (Paul uses the present tense, as the legal service was then existing), year by year, on the Day of Atonement, entering the Holy of Holies.
Beacon Bible Commentary
Extends the thought of the previous verse by affirming that this crucial self-presentation before the Father does not need to be repeated, as the high priest entereth into the [earthly] holy place every year with blood of others.
So we see that offer, here, is referring to Jesus' entry into heaven, and the presentation of His completed sacrifice.
Where does this leave the Adventist sanctuary doctrine? Jesus already fulfilled the cleansing that Adventists apply to 1844. Jesus' death, entry, and purification already happened in the first century, past tense to the writing of Hebrews.
A technical note on the translation of Ta Hagia
A Greek term that is often debated when discussing Jesus' entry into the heavenly sanctuary is ta hagia. The term is actually the adjective holy and is used in various forms in Hebrews, primarily as a substantive, or noun, describing the holy place.
The term has been translated a number of ways in the different verses of Hebrews. Some Bible versions are more consistent than others in their translation of the word.
The debate is whether the term refers to
a. the holy place
b. the most holy place
c. the whole sanctuary.
I have taken the same position as the Adventist scholars on the Daniel and Revelation Committee who studied the Hebrews material. Their summary is given below:
The committee believes that ta hagia should be regarded as a general term that should be translated in most instances as “sanctuary” unless the context clearly indicates otherwise (such as in chapter 9:2, 3). ("Daniel and Revelation Committee Report," Issues in the Book of Hebrews, 5 )
For more information on evidence for the term most often referring to the whole sanctuary, the reader is directed to the article of Alwyn P. Salom, "Ta Hagia in the Epistle to the Hebrews." This article originally appeared in Andrews University Seminary Studies and was reprinted in Issues in the Book of Hebrews as an appendix.
You can read it online, hosted in the archives of Andrews University Seminary Studies.
feedback@adventistsanctuary.com
NOTE: This site is not affiliated with the Seventh-day Adventist Church in any way. The purpose of this site is to generate discussion on the Seventh-day Adventist sanctuary teaching.