|
XXVII - 06(94)
"Watchman,
what of the night?"
"The hour has come, the hour is striking and striking at you,
the hour and the end!" Eze. 7:6 (Moffatt)
THEOLOGY OF THE SANCTUARY - V
The prophecies of Daniel which relate themselves to the sanctuary typology, especially the ritual of the Day of Atonement, are found in chapters seven and eight. Daniel 8:14 (KJV) states plainly that after a certain point in time, "then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." in Daniel 7, "the judgment was set and the books were opened" (v. 10), with the decision being rendered in behalf of "the saints of the Most High" (v. 22). Daniel 8 relates the question of the time of the cleansing - "How long?" - with two other factors, "the daily," and "the transgression of desolation." (8:13) In Daniel 7, the context of the judgment is set in the symbolism of "beasts" and a "little horn." It covers from a period of time dominated by a "lion" to the time when the final beast symbol is "given to the burning flame." (v. 11) In explaining what Daniel saw in the vision of the third year of Belshazzar, the angel Gabriel introduced his explanation with the words, "Understand, 0 son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision. (8:17)
To this picture must be added the factor that in Daniel 8, the time - the 2300 days - is left unexplained. Gabriel does not return till approximately eleven years later and gives a breakdown of the "seventy weeks." (9:24-27) Is this a segment of the over-all time period? This question must be answered.
The interrelationship of these three chapters with the typology of the sanctuary forms the foundation for the Three Angels' Messages of Revelation 14 which is the centerpiece of the Adventist kerygma. The first angel proclaimed, "The hour of [God's] judgment is come." (v. 7) Is this the judgment of Daniel 7, and the "cleansing" of Daniel 8:14? Is this the judgment "of God"? Or is it God acting in judgment upon earthly forces? Or do both factors enter into the picture as given in the prophecies?
Page 2
DANIEL 8:14
This verse presents several questions which need to be answered. It reads - "Unto two thousand and three hundred days then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." (KJV) The usual word for "day" (yom)
is not used but rather the Hebrew text reads, "evening morning." Does this mean,
therefore, that 1150 full days are meant rather than 2300 days? "The choice of
so unusual a measure of time, derived from the two chief parts of the day,
instead of the simple measure of time by days, probably originates with
reference to the morning and evening sacrifice, by which the day was to be
consecrated to the Lord, after Gen. 1. 5, 8, 13, etc., where the days of the
creation week are named and reckoned according to the succession of evening and
morning. This separation of the expression into evening and morning, so as to
number them separately and add them together would make 2300 evening-mornings =
1150 days, is shown to be inadmissible, both by the asyndeton [omission of the
conjunction between] evening-morning and the usages of the Hebrew language. That
in verse 26 ("the evening and the morning") stands for it, does not prove that
the evening and morning are reckoned separately, but only that evening-morning
is a period of time consisting of evening and morning. When the Hebrews wish to
express separately day and night, the component parts of a day or a week, then
the number of both is expressed. They say, for example, forty days and forty
nights (Gen. vii. 4, 12; Ex. xxiv. 18; 1 Kings xix. 8), and three days and three
nights (Jonah ii. 1; Matt. xii. 40), but not eighty or six days-and-nights, when
they wish to speak of forty or three full days. A Hebrew reader could not
possibly understand the period of time 2300 evening-mornings of 2300 half days
or 1150 whole days, because evening and morning at the creation constituted not
the half but the whole day. Still less, in the designation of time, "till 2300
evening-mornings," could "evening-mornings" be understood of the evening and
morning sacrifices, and the words be regarded as meaning, that till 1150 evening
sacrifices and 1150 morning sacrifices are discontinued. We must therefore take
the words as they are, i.e. understand them of 2300 whole days."
(Keil-Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, Vol. IX, Bk III, pp. 303-304)
This revelation of the 2300 days by an holy one is being expressed in sanctuary language. The use of "evening-morning" for a "day" is borrowed from the "morning and, evening" sacrifices connected with the sanctuary ritual, but reversed to reflect the day of creation - "there was evening, there was morning, day one." (Gen. 1:5, lit.) Further, in the context of Daniel 8:14 (see verses 11-13), is the word, "daily" (tamid),
an adjective, used five times in the book of Daniel as a substantive. The first
use of tamid as an adjective in the Old Testament is in connection with the morning and evening sacrifice. (Ex. 29:42) In Numbers 28 & 29, the word is used no less that seventeen times in connection with the ministration of the sanctuary. In these chapters it is translated with one exception by the word, "continual."
The word, "cleansed," in Daniel 8:14 (KJV) is the translation given for the
Hebrew word, tzadak, which in other translations is either "justified" or "vindicated." The word,
tzadak is the word used in the Masoretic Hebrew text, and is properly translated, by either "vindicated" or "justified." However, both the Septuagint (LXX), the Greek translation of the Old Testament, and the Latin Vulgate have in their respective languages, a word which can only be translated, "shall be cleansed." The LXX uses the very word as used in Leviticus 16 for cleansed, katharisthesomai.
In 1948, the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York published Studies in
Daniel by Dr. H. Louis Ginsberg, Sabato Morais Professor of Bible at the
Seminary. In this work, Dr Ginsberg stated that "the Hebrew portions of Daniel
(i,e, chs 1-2: 4a; 8-12) are...translated from Aramaic originals is a hypothesis
of long standing, but was only demonstrated by Zimmermann [in] 1938 and 1939."
While it is admitted that some of Zimmermann's arguments are not cogent, others
"are so telling that they suffice to establish the thesis."(p. 41) He cites
various erroneous translations into the Hebrew from the Aramaic original, one of
which is Daniel 8:14. In the Aramaic the word, wyiddaki, should have been
rendered into the Hebrew, taher meaning to cleanse, rather than tzadak. Thus in three languages, the Aramaic, Greek and Latin the objective of Daniel 8:14 can be related linguistically to the Day of Atonement.
In Daniel 8, there is no terminus a quo given from which to begin the
2300 days. The angel Gabriel was instructed to make Daniel understand the
vision. (8:16) However, when Gabriel reached the part of the vision referring to
the 2300 evening-mornings, Daniel fainted. (8:26-27). Not until eleven years
later did he return in response to Daniel's prayer. (9:1-22) It was then that
the "seventy weeks" prophecy was given with its terminus a quo, "from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build
Page 3
Jerusalem." (9:25) However, can it be justified defining the "seventy weeks" as the initial
part of the 2300 days thus giving to it the same beginning date?
In Daniel 8 & 9, two different Hebrew words are translated by the single English word, "vision" -chazon
and mar'eh. 2 To the whole of the vision - the
ram, he-goat, little horn, the daily, as well as the 2300 days - the word,
chazon, is used. (8:2, 13, 17, 26b; 9:21) The word mar'eh is applied
to the 2300 days as a distinct part from the whole. (8:16, 26a, 27; 9:23) It was
the mar'eh that Gabriel was to make Daniel understand (v. 16); it was the
mar'eh which Daniel did not understand when he fainted and the record of the
eighth chapter closed (v. 27). It is this mar'eh which Gabriel, when he returns, asks Daniel to understand and consider. It is then that he introduces the "seventy weeks." (9:23-24 ) 3
To establish a terminus a quo for the 2300 days without recognizing the connection between Daniel 8 & 9, interpreters of the little horn, "the abomination of desolation" of Daniel 8, have assigned its fulfillment to Antiochus Epiphanes, and the 2300 days as the time during which he desecrated the temple at Jerusalem. This was the position of the Jews in the time of Christ. Josephus, writing after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, so applied the prophecy. (See SDA Bible Dictionary [RV], p. 258). Not so Jesus. He nullified such an interpretation, stating - "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)." (Matt. 24:15) It
was not Antiochus Epiphanes; that was past history when Jesus spoke. It was the pagan Roman power which would destroy the temple and terminate its services in A.D. 70.
This leaves as the only alternative the acceptance of the fact that Daniel 8
& 9 are connected both linguistically and contextually. Contextually, it was
Gabriel who was commanded to make Daniel understand the vision in chapter 8; it
was the same Gabriel who returned in chapter 9, to complete his assignment. Thus
the terminus a quo for the "seventy weeks" - "the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem" in 457 B. C. (9:25) - becomes also the
beginning date for the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14. 4
The question that remains: What prophetic hermeneutic shall be used to rightly apply this time period of the 2300 days? The historistic method which has been the basis of Adventism's understanding of prophecy is that one day in prophecy equals one year of literal time. 5
From the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem in 457 B.C., the terminus
ad quem would be then in 1844. With the "seventy weeks" focusing on the
sacrifice of the Messiah (9:26), and the 2300 days centering on the cleansing of
the sanctuary, there is overlaid on the two foci of the earthly sanctuary ritual
- the daily services at the altar of the court, and the yearly involving the
most holy - a prophecy which delineates in time the antitypical ministry of
Jesus Christ both at the Cross and in the Heavenly Sanctuary. Thus typology and
prophecy can unite in a justifiable Theology of the Sanctuary. 6
There remains but one more prophecy which involves "the hour of God's judgment" - Daniel 7 - which amplifies the significance of the Day of Atonement ritual.
NOTES:
l We have record of the use of the Aramaic (Chaldee) in the Scripture by Laban in making his final covenant with Jacob. (Gen. 31:47) Centuries later the officers of King Hezekiah requested that Rabshakeh speak to them in Aramaic ("Syrian") for they said, "we understand it." (II Kings 18:26) Most officials seem to have been bilingual, or even trilingual, at that time. It was the court language of Babylon. (Daniel 2:4 "Syriac") When the Persians took over the empire, they made Aramaic its official language. Daniel served in the transitional government as chairman of the presidium (6:2), and "continued even unto the first year of king Cyrus." (1:21) He was no stranger to the Aramaic. The Aramaic could be considered the lingua franca of this period of Near Eastern history. With the coming of the Grecian kingdom of Alexander, it was replaced by the Koine Greek which prevailed from 300 B.C. to 500 A.D. This Greek was the language of both the LXX and the New Testament.
2 Chazon and Mar'eh could be considered synonyms. Only the
context indicates the distinctive use of the two words. Chazon covers the
vision as a whole, while Mar'eh indicates a part of the vision which in this case is the communication involving the 2300 days. The following is the use of the two words in Chapters 8 & 9:
Daniel
8:1 -- "a chazon appeared unto me..."
8:2 -- "I saw in a chazon..."
8:3 -- "I saw in a chazon..."
8:13 -- "How long shall be the chazon..."
8:15 -- "I Daniel, had seen the chazon,..."
8:16 -- "Make this man to understand the mar'eh."
8:17 -- "At the time of the end shall be the chazon."
8:26 -- "The mar'eh of the evening and morning."
8-26 -- "Shut thou up the chazon."
Page 4
8:27 -- I was astonished at the mar'eh."
9:21 -- "Seen in the chazon at the beginning."
9:23 -- "Consider the mar'eh."
9:24 -- "Seal up the chazon."
3 The Hebrew word for "determined" (KJV) , "decreed" (RSV) (NIV), is
chathak. This word appears nowhere else in the Old Testament, therefore it
is impossible to bring other Biblical usages to bear on its meaning in Daniel
9:24. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Brown, Driver &
Briggs) renders the word according to late Hebrew as "cut, cut off, decide," and
so also the Aramaic. (p. 367) Albert Barnes in his Notes on the Old Testament
comments on the force of the word, chathak "The meaning would seem to be, that this portion of time - the seventy weeks -
was cut off from the whole duration, or cut of it, as it were, and set by itself for a definite purpose." ("Daniel," Vol. 2, p. 141)
4 The "commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem" required three decrees
by Persian rulers. Ezra wrote that the "elders of the Jews . . .builded and
finished it according to the commandment of the God of Israel, and according to
the commandment of Cyrus, and Darius, and Artaxerxes king of Persia." (6:14) The
decree in the 7th year of Artaxerxes restored to the Jews, administrative
authority and judicial power. It also exempted all connected with the temple
service from taxation. (7:24-26) The verification of the 7th year of Artaxerxes
being 457 B. C. is documented in the book, The Chronology of Ezra 7 co-authored by
Siegfried H. Horn and Lynn H. Wood.
5 The application of the year-day principle to prophecy is based Biblically on Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6. In the case of Ezekiel, it was the Lord who stated to him, "I have appointed thee each day for a year." In the book of Daniel we observe that Daniel did not ask questions concerning what he already knew about. For example, in the vision of the four beasts, he only asked in regard to the fourth beast and little horn. (7:19) He didn't inquire about the first beast, the "lion with eagles wings," because it was a familiar symbol which he saw daily in governmental service. So likewise, he made no inquiry about the various "times" he was shown. Ezekiel had been instructed as to their interpretation. Even in his deep concern for Jerusalem, his prayer for Heaven's intervention was based on Jeremiah's prophecy, rather than on the still unexplained vision of the 2300 days. (9:2)
Jewish scholars as early as the 2nd Century A.D. adopted this principle.
Later Jewish scholars of the 9th and 10th Century applied the principle to the
70 weeks and the 2300 days. (Froom, Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. I, p. 713; Vol. II, p. 195)
William Miller used this year/day principle in his interpretation of Daniel
8:14, and 9:24-27.He declared himself to be "in accordance with the opinions of
all the standard Protestant commentators," which included Mede, Sir Isaac Newton
and Thomas Newton. In fact, the Millerites found little need to defend
themselves on this point because of the general acceptance of the use of this
principle even by those who otherwise opposed them. (See Kai Arasola, The End of Historicism, pp. 86-88)
6 The "Seventy weeks" were divided into 7 weeks, 62 weeks (a total of 69 weeks), and one final week. During the final week, the "Messiah [was to] be cut off." (Daniel 9:26) In being "cut off" what did He accomplish? (The Hebrew word here translated "cut off" is not the same as is used for "determined" in verse 24. (See Note #3 above) During the "seventy weeks" or 490 days certain objectives were to be realized. 1) Jewish probation would be extended 490 years. 2) Transgression, sins and iniquity were to end. 3) In their place would be established everlasting righteousness. 4) The vision (chazon) would be sealed as well as that "prophet." (Heb., see margin KJV) And 5) The Most Holy would be anointed.
Three different Hebrew words are used for transgression, sins, and iniquity. The word for "transgression" (peshag) also carries the idea of rebellion or defection against God (Gesenius). If this concept is to be considered a continuation of the preceding thought that an extension of probationary time would be allotted to the Jewish nation, rather than connected with that which follows, "to make an end of sins," this is indicating that within the period of the "seventy weeks," the Jews would fill up the cup of their iniquity. The word for "sins" (chatta'oth) could be translated "sin offerings" as well as sin. This Christ did when He, as the Lamb of God, became the once-for-all-time offering for sin. However, the plural form as is found in this text is so translated only in one other place (Neh. 10:33), otherwise it is translated, "sins" as in this verse. The word for "iniquity" (gavon) is coupled with the idea of atonement - "to make reconciliation" (kaphar). This Jesus accomplished in His giving of Himself in sacrifice. (Eph. 2:13-14)
During this period "everlasting righteousness" was to be brought in. Jeremiah prophesied that the day would come when the Lord would raise "unto David a righteous Branch," and He would be called "The Lord our Righteousness." (Jer. 23:6) This Branch was the Messiah, who in the flesh condemned sin and revealed the fulness of grace and truth.
Two other things to be accomplished involved the sealing of the vision, making it sure by all events being fulfilled on time, and also placing a seal on a "prophet" (KJV - "prophecy"). Both of these points are noted in the gospel of John. There is constant reference to the fact that Christ's life moved on a pre-arranged schedule. His hour had not yet come (John 7:6; 8:20), or He "knew that His hour was come." (13:1) In the same Gospel, Jesus
is recognized as "that Prophet" (6:14), and the One whom the Father hath sealed (6:27).
The final objective was "to anoint the most Holy." Here is sanctuary language. Jesus as that "prophet" would fulfil the typical work that Moses did, who when upon the erection of the earthly type, anointed the whole prior to Aaron beginning his ministry in it. Likewise Christ, who "pitched" the Heavenly Sanctuary, anointed the whole before beginning His ministry in the "holy place" at the Throne of Grace. (Heb. 8:1-2; 4:16; 10:19-20).
Page 5
LAODICEA'S NEED
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith." (Rom. 1:16-17)
The gospel is a power which saves all who believe it, or it is the Word that is powerful to rescue all who put their trust in it. The gospel is called the power of God in contradistinction to the power of man. The power of man is the ability by which man, according to his carnal opinion, obtains salvation by his own strength and performs the things which are of the flesh. This ability, God, by the cross of Christ, has utterly declared useless. He now gives us His own power by which the believer is empowered unto salvation. Man's own power must be laid in the dust, otherwise the power of God cannot operate in him. The rich and the mighty do not receive the gospel for it is written: "To the poor [in spirit] the gospel is preached." (Luke 7:22)
It is true that whoever does not believe will be ashamed of the Gospel and contradict it in his heart and conduct, for he who finds pleasure in that which is of the flesh, cannot find pleasure in that which is spiritual. He is not only ashamed of the preaching of the Gospel, but personally fights against it, refusing to be converted. He hates the light and loves darkness even considering the gospel to be downright stupidity for "the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (I Cor. 2:14) Therefore, he who believes the Gospel must become weak and foolish before men, in order that he might be strong and wise in the power and wisdom of God. "The foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men....Not many wise men after the flesh...are called: but God hath chosen the foolish things of the, world to confound the wise; and...the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty." (I Cor. 1:25-27)
If a man has faith in his own power and strength it is nothing less than pure idolatry and heathenism. The worldly perception of a heathen is an incorrect one. The heathen is the man who doesn't know the power of God. He may be a religious person, but God is not the source of his wisdom. This is the general condition of those professing truth in these last days. They will be "lovers of their own selves," but having only" a form of godliness," they "deny the power thereof." (II Tim. 3:1-5) To have a form of godliness, but to deny its power is to hold the truth in unrighteousness. "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness." (Romans l:l8)
The sin of omitting that which is good leads to the sin of committing that which is positively evil. After showing how the heathen sinned by neglecting the power of the true God, Paul reveals how they sinned by establishing the worship of false gods or idols. "Because that, when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools." (1:21-22)
Observe in the text the steps of heathen perversion: The first step in idolatry
was ingratitude; he was not thankful. Whoever enjoys God's gifts as though he had not graciously received them, thus forgetting the Donor, will soon find himself filled with self-complacency. The next step is vanity: he "became vain in [his] imaginations" which caused him to delight in himself, enjoying only that which brought satisfaction to him. All his plans, efforts and endeavors expressed vanity. The third step
is blindness; for deprived of truth and steeped in vanity, a man naturally becomes blind, void of feeling and perverted in thinking. The fourth step is
total departure from God. This is the worst for when a man turns totally from God, there remains nothing else for God to do but to give him up to all manner of shame and vice according to the will of Satan. "And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do the things which are not convenient." (Rom. 1:28)
In the same way also, man sinks into spiritual idolatry, but of a more sophisticated kind, known as the Laodicean condition. "Because thou sayest, I am rich and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked." (Rev. 3:17) Ingratitude and vanity (of one's own wisdom and righteousness) perverts a man so thoroughly that he refuses to be reproved, thinking that his conduct is good and pleasing to God. This produces blindness, and
Page 6
blindness produces idolatry, and idolatry leads to a whole deluge of vices.
God, in His great mercy, has provided a Divine remedy: "I counsel thee to buy of Me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve that thou mayest see." (Rev. 3:18) Just as there are certain steps on the downward path to idolatry, so God has provided a sure path to Christ. The Laodicean needs gold tried in the fire. He needs something to restore his gratitude to God. He needs a revelation of the Cross of Christ. "If sinners can be led to give one earnest look at the cross, if they can obtain a full view of the crucified Saviour, they will realize the depths of God's compassion and sinfulness of sin." (AA:209)
One need look only at the evangelistic approach of the Apostles. It was twofold: 1) They emphasized the terrible crime of men in putting to death the One who so clearly demonstrated in His life that He was the Son of God. And 2) They exalted the Crucified One as the Lamb of God who taketh away the sins of the world, thus holding out to repentant sinners the offer of mercy and pardon through the shed blood of Jesus. This is the precious gold which restores gratitude in the heart of the lukewarm Laodicean.
"Without the cross, man could have no union with the Father. On it depends our every hope. From it shines the light of the Saviour's love; and when at the foot of the cross the sinner looks up to the One who died to save him, he may rejoice with the fulness of joy; for his sins are pardoned. Kneeling in faith at the cross, he has reached the highest place to which man can attain." (ibid., 209-210)
Though the Apostle Paul did not witness the crucifixion of Christ, it is evident that the revelation on the Damascus way, together with information received from eyewitnesses, made it absolutely real to him. The cross was ever the center of his teaching and the recognized source of his power to win men. He exalted the knowledge of Christ crucified as the one supreme and indispensable truth. "For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ and him crucified." (I Cor. 2:2)
Not only should we be grateful that the Son of God suffered and died for us, but that He was resurrected. Because of this, at the throne of God is One who understands all the feelings of our infirmities having been tempted in all points as we are. He is able through His intercession to save to the uttermost all that return to God by Him.
"We cannot appreciate our Redeemer in the highest sense until we see Him by the eye of faith reaching to the very depths of human wretchedness, taking upon Himself the nature of man, the capacity to suffer, and by suffering putting forth His divine power to save and lift sinners up to companionship with Himself." (That I May Know Him, p. 287)
Once gratitude is restored in the heart of the Laodicean, is it possible for him to remain vain?
"Looking upon the crucified Redeemer, we more fully comprehend the magnitude and meaning of the sacrifice made by the Majesty of heaven. The plan of salvation is glorified before us, and the thought of Calvary awakens living and sacred emotions in our hearts and on our lips; for pride and self worship cannot flourish in the soul that keeps fresh in memory the scenes of Calvary." (DA:661)
Our appreciation of the redemption wrought for us by the Saviour on the cross will be proportion to our realization of the depths from which we are rescued.
The Laodicean is counseled to "buy of Me...white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed." Jesus Christ "took upon Himself, fallen, suffering human nature, degraded and defiled by sin" (4BC:1147), and condemning sin in the flesh, He provided for us a robe of righteousness. This the believer accepts by faith only if there is felt a need to be clothed. The Laodicean senses no need for the Righteousness of Christ so long as his vanity tells him he is in need of nothing. A look at Calvary reveals how deceitful and desperately wicked the heart of man is (Jer. 17:9), how filthy our righteousnesses are (Isa. 64:6). It uncovers the nakedness of the Laodicean, who realizing his shame, reaches out the hand of faith and claims the white raiment so freely offered him.
When I survey the wondrous cross
On which the Prince of Glory died,
My richest gain I count but loss,
And pour contempt on all my pride.
The third step to idolatry was blindness. The eyesalve offered in the message to Laodicea is that spiritual discernment that enables him to see the wiles and deceptions of the enemy so that he can shun them; to detect sin and abhor it; and to
Page 7
see truth and obey it. It is the Holy Spirit that opens blind eyes to the
light of truth and guides therein. The Lord in His great mercy, sent a most
precious light to His people through Elders Waggoner and Jones in 1888. "This message was to bring more prominently before the world the uplifted Saviour, the sacrifice for the sins of the whole world [gold tried in the fire]. It presented justification by faith in the Surety; it invited the people to receive the righteousness of Christ [white raiment], which was made manifest in obedience to all the commandments of God. Many had lost sight of Jesus. They needed
to have their eyes directed to His divine person, His merits, and His changeless love for the human family [heavenly eyesalve]." (TM:91-92)
This was the Third Angel's Message in verity. Jesus was pleading with His people to leave the pathway of idolatry and return to Him. But that precious message was despised, ridiculed and rejected, which has led to a total departure from God. Corporate Laodicea is now given over to the perversions of the heathen as listed in Romans 1:22-32. However, to the individual Laodicean, Christ "the power of God, and the wisdom of God" (I Cor. 1:24) stands at the door and knocks. The Gospel of Christ that is to lighten the whole earth with God's glory is calling for all to come off the pathway of idolatry to walk as did Enoch with the God who made the heavens and earth.
"O sinful man! how canst thou e'er repay
That love so deep, so infinite, so free?
Yield up to Him thy life, thy love, thine all,
In grateful homage bow thy stubborn knee."
Terrie Lambert
Terrie in cooperation with her husband, Darren, maintains the office operations of the Adventist Laymen's foundation in Australia.
LET'S TALK IT OVER
From the middle of February to the first of April, I was away from the desk visiting, speaking, and studying with various groups of concerned Adventists in Australia. The same divisions which haunt the "independents" in the States, plague the work in Australia. This year while the response was greater than last year at several appointments, the opposition was also more pronounced, coming from three sources, the regular church, the Standish cohorts, and the group at Kin Kin.
We discovered on the part of deeply concerned Adventists a desire to be given the word of God free from the church bashing which has become the hallmark of many of the independents in Australia. We found that heresy is just as rampant among the "many voices" in Australia as in the States. We also discovered, at least in part, why the confusion.
During the itinerary which took us from Melbourne to Bundaberg, and from Sydney to Perth, we had a free evening, and in the city where we stayed a meeting was being conducted by a spokesman for the "Concerned Brethren." While the objective was to "bash" a publication by one who had recently been in Australia from the States, I could hardly believe what I was hearing in the interpretation of the prophecies
The small group that had come together were told that after 34 AD, the term "Jerusalem" whether used in a prophecy, or historical setting, referred to the church, and could not be understood as the literal city. I wondered what would have happened to the Christians in Jerusalem in 66 AD if they had so
interpreted the prophecies of Jesus? Wrong principles of interpretation only lead to confusion and division.
To my surprise, the speaker interpreted Daniel 11:45 just as Robert Brinsmead had done in his essay on "The Vision at the Hiddekel." Yet inquiry revealed that this man had opposed him when Brinsmead was leading what was termed "The Awakening." Now he is teaching the same thing. Perhaps given a little time, if such should last, he will do the same with the book he was bashing that evening. Unless we are grounded in sound principles of Biblical interpretation we will vacillate like a reed shaken in the wind. Sound principles of interpretation plus the acceptance of the Biblical dictum, as well as the counsel found in the Writings, that truth is progressive would go far in eliminating the confusion in the community of Adventism especially among so-called historic Adventists.
whg
|