|
Volume III - Number 3
"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)
THE LIGHT FROM THE THRONE
(Part Three)
EDITORIAL
If you do not wish to think new concepts based on fundamentals of truth, then read no further. Either put the paper away until you are willing to do so, or throw it immediately into "File 13."
Whether we want to admit it or not, we do have problems with the sanctuary doctrine. Many, too many, have discarded the teaching altogether, accepting Barnhouse's evaluation that it "is the most colossal, psychological, face-saving phenomenon in religious history." (See Manuscript - The Seventh-day Adventist-Evangelical Conferences of 1955-1956) Those who recognize that there are problems, but perceive the sanctuary truth to be light from the Throne of God can do one of two things: 1) Ignore the problem and put their heads in the sand; or 2) Face the problem and offer a solution, refining their concepts. -The rest will continue in their blind traditionalism.
Several years ago, I was invited through the instrumentality of a young couple to speak at a church gathering here in Arkansas made up of a group of people dedicated to what became known as the "new theology." In discussing the agreed to subject on the sanctuary and the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14, it was anticipated by the group leaders that I would use nothing but the Writings. This I did not do. After reading from the Writings the place of the Sanctuary doctrine and Daniel 8:14 in the original Adventist theology, I proceeded to give the Bible basis for that faith. When I finished, one young lady on the front row exclaimed - "I do not have to give up my belief in the sanctuary, I can now believe it from the Bible." Not all shared that new found joy, and some of the local leaders ranted and raved referring to Crosier's apostasy, but they could not refute the Word of God.
This brings us to another grave, but fundamental question. What do we do with the Writings in regard to the Sanctuary teaching? There are those, who if one does not accept the Writings of Ellen G. White as infallible, are willing to spread the propaganda that that one does not believe in Ellen G. White. First, one must understand that there is only One in whom one must "believe" for salvation, and that is the Lord Jesus Christ - no human being! Secondly, one must realize that to recognize that the Writings of Ellen G. White are not infallible is to accept her own testimony. She wrote:
In regard to infallibility, I never claimed it; God alone is infallible. His word is true, and in Him is no variableness, or shadow of turning. (Letter 10, 1895; quoted in SM, bk. i , p. 37)
We compound our problem when we do not recognize the difference between "impeccable" and "infallible." Ellen G. White never even intimated that she was impeccable, for she recognized that she along with the rest of us were sinning, erring mortals. She also did not claim "infallibility" which means "incapable of error: unerring (in memory); sure, certain (in remedy);" and "incapable of error in defining doctrines touching faith or morals" (Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary). Further, she emphatically taught in the book, Great Controversy, that because there is a widespread departure from the doctrines and teachings of the Scriptures, "there is need of a return to the great Protestant principle, - the Bible and the Bible only, as the rule of faith and duty."(pp. 204-205) Then she told why this is essential: - "Satan's manner of working against God and His word has not changed; he is still as much opposed to the Scriptures being made the guide of life as in the sixteenth century." Today the enemy has produced a masterpiece of deception. He has taken the works of the "messenger of the Lord" and led the professed people of God to accept them as an infallible substitute for the Bible.
We need to go one step further. We have this counsel in regard to doctrinal unity:
We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they well never have to give up a cherished view, never have an occasion to change an opinion will be disappointed. (TM, p. 30)
In college, the professor to New Testament Greek used to quote this reference frequently when we were reading the text. It would wrankle me no end. I thought him to be a heretic. But today in retrospect, he was my best Bible teacher on the undergraduate level. He taught me to do in thinking and study what Jesus told the disciples to do in fishing - "Launch out into the deep." We have been doing too much "surface" studying of the Word of God. We have been advised:
We do not go deep enough in our search for truth... God wants our minds to expand. (TM, p. 119; read whole page)
This is what the current issue of the Commentary is all about. If you wish to explore with me some questions and expand your thinking, then with your Bibles open, begin reading this issue.
Page 2
THE LIGHT FROM THE THRONE
Part Three
In beginning the study of the services of the Day of Atonement, we need first to outline in detail what was done under the shadowy services of the type. The instruction found in Leviticus 16 followed closely after the death of Aaron's two sons who "offered strange- fire before the Lord." "(Lev. 10:1; 16:1) Even Aaron, the High Priest, was not to come "at all times into the holy place within the vail before the mercy seat, which is upon the ark." (16:2)
(You will observe that in the KJV the word, "place," is in italics, being supplied. In the Hebrew, the word is kodesh, the same word as used in Psalm 77:13 - "Thy way,
O God, is in the sanctuary (kodesh). The LXX uses the Greek word, to hagion, the same as is used in Hebrews 9:1, and translated "sanctuary." However, in Leviticus 16, it is clearly defined as to its application the second apartment or most holy place of the sanctuary.)
When Aaron was to come into the most holy place on the Day of Atonement, he was to bring a young bullock for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering. (16:3) The "bullock" was to be "for himself, and for his house." (16:11) But no hands were laid upon the head of this bullock in either confession or transference, yet it was called a "sin offering." One might reply that because this was a sin offering, the law of the sin offering required that this be done. No blood carrying the confession of sin could cleanse, and in the final step of the cleansing the cleansing of the Altar of the Court the blood of the bullock was mingled with the blood of the Lord's goat. (16:18)
On the Day of Atonement, throughout the ministry of cleansing, Aaron was to wear the "holy garments" made of linen. (16:4) These were not removed until he had finished the whole ritual of the day up to and including the transfer of sin to the head of the live goat. (16:23)
Two kids of goats were taken from the congregation, and were presented before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle. (16:7) Over these, lots were cast, one goat becoming the Lord's goat, and the other for Azazel, or the scapegoat. A comment found in Keil Delitzsch explains well the significance of "one lot for the Lord, and the other lot for the scapegoat" (Heb. - Azazel; 16:8, margin) It reads:
The words, one lot for Jehovah and one for Azazel, require unconditionally that Azazel should be regarded as a personal being in
opposition to Jehovah ... We have not to think, however, of any demon, who seduces men to wickedness in the form of an evil spirit, as the fallen angel Azazel is represented as doing in Jewish writings ..., like the terrible fiend Shibe, whom the Arabs of the peninsula of Sinai so much dread ..., but of the devil himself, the head of the fallen angels, who was afterwards called Satan; for no subordinate evil spirit could have been placed in antithesis to Jehovah as Azazel is here, but only the ruler or head of the kingdom of demons. (Vol. 1, p. 398)
Three times Aaron enters the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement. First to burn incense, so that "a cloud of incense may cover the mercy seat that is upon the testimony." (16:12-13) Next he brings the blood of the bullock, and sprinkles it seven times before the ark. (16:14) Finally the blood of the Lord's goat is brought in and the same procedure is followed as for the blood of the bullock. (16:15) Then the text reads:
He shall make an atonement for the holy place [most holy], because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins. (16:16)
Here we must pause and do some thinking. If in fact, the blood of the sin offerings represented the transference of sin to the sanctuary, how did the sin get into the Most Holy Place, inasmuch as no blood was ever taken into that Most Holy Place during the year? Further, none of the blood on the Day of Atonement which was taken in was laden with sin. The truth is, the record of the sins of Israel were already recorded there, and the blood of the sin offerings merely indicated that the penalty had been paid for a life had been given. Now the record had to be expunged, and the final penalty for sin adjudicated. But along with sin is introduced the "uncleannessess of the children of Israel." This facet enters the ritual services again as the cleansing continues. While the record of the sins and transgressions could be expunged in the Most Holy Place, the uncleanness could not. The question remains - what does this phase of the cleansing mean? This must be addressed, and this we shall do as the study continues.
Following the cleansing of the Most Holy Place, the High Priest also cleansed the holy place, or first apartment, noted as "the tabernacle." (16:16) This was performed because of the record placed on the horns of the Altar of Incense. The instruction read:
And Aaron shall make an atonement upon the horns of it [Altar of Incense] once in a year with the blood of the sin offering of atonements. (Ex. 30:10)
Page 3
It must be kept in mind that on this Altar during the year was recorded only the blood of corporate confession.
Then Aaron went to the Court. (16:18) Here the blood of the bullock and the blood of the Lord's goat were mingled for the cleansing of the Altar of Burnt Offering. Two things should be observed: 1) This Altar carried the record of the confessed sins of the individual, and the fact that the penalty had been paid. And 2) Only the uncleanness of the children of Israel is mentioned in this cleansing, not their sins. (16:19)
After Aaron had "made an end of reconciling the [most] holy place, and the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar" (16:20), then the live goat entered the picture. On him the High Priest placed "both" of his hands and "confessed" over the goat "all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins." (16:21) This goat was then dispatched by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness, to "a land not inhabited." (16:22) Again it should be observed that the uncleanness of the children of Israel was not included, only that which had been adjudicated in the Most Holy Place. The cleansing of the uncleanness ended at the Altar of the court.
It is well to note in passing that after Aaron had assumed his official attire, he offered his burnt offering, and a sin offering for the congregation, thus bringing the blood of confession once again into the sanctuary. (Cmp. Lev. 16:24 & Num. 29:11) The new year had begun and with it came the same round of services which could not make the comer there unto perfect. It was but shadowy. The Reality to which it pointed could and would accomplish the objective of God and the longing of the contrite soul.
OTHER ASPECTS AND QUESTIONS
The Day of Atonement was more sacred than a regular Sabbath. It is called a "Sabbath of sabbaths." (Lev. 23:32, Heb. ) "All the various elements effecting atonement are in a marked degree combined in the Day of Atonement ... It is called - 'shabbat shabbaton,' the holiest of rest days." (Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. II, p. 280; quoted in Messiah in His Sanctuary, p. 67) On this day, as on the weekly Sabbath, no work was to be done, while on the other feast days, "servile work" - the performance of a trade - alone was prohibited. (Lev. 23:28, cmp. with 23:7) It was to be fast day, a day for soul affliction. It was called "the fast" by Luke. (Acts 27:9, margin)
The blood of the Lord's goat is noted in Scripture as "the sin offering of atonements" (Ex. 30:10) The same emphasis is to be found in Leviticus 23, though not apparent in the KJV. Literally, the record reads: "On the tenth of this seventh month is a day of atonements ... and ye shall do no work in this same day: for it is a day of atonements, to make an atonement for you." (27-28)
This day called for soul affliction, fasting and no work. In contemplating .the significance of these requirements, it would be well to ponder the message of Isaiah 58:1-7. An observation worthy of much thought is to be found in the chapter. "The Seal of God." (Testimonies, Vol.5) It reads:
In the time when (God's) wrath shall go forth in judgments, ["the little company who are standing in the light", the] humble devoted followers of Christ will be distinguished from the rest of the world by their soul-anguish, which will be expressed in lamentation and weeping, reproofs and warnings. (p.210)
The Day of Atonement cannot be disassociated from the concept of the sealing. The modern orthodox Jews in their celebration of The Day, pray during its closing hours the following prayer:
Our Father, our King, seal our name in the book of life; our Father, our King, seal our name in the book of remembrance; our Father, our King, seal our name in the book of success and prosperity. ("Prayers for the Day of Atonement" quoted in Messiah in His Sanctuary, p. 69)
The Jewish Encyclopedia contributes to this concept:
Down to the first century, the idea of the divine judgment was mainly eschatological in character, as deciding the destiny of the soul after death rather than of men on earth. But ... the idea developed also in Jewish circles that on the first of Tishri [the seventh month] the sacred New Year's Day, ...man's doings were judged and his destiny decided; and on the tenth of Tishri [the Day of Atonement] the decree of Heaven was sealed. (Vol. II, p. 281)
F. C. Gilbert after quoting the above reference comments:
The belief in the sealing work on this most holy day has been prevalent and accepted among the seed of Abraham for many centuries. This idea is found in their literature through the ages. (Messiah in His Sanctuary, p. 71)
The relationship between the Day of Atonement and the Sealing work is further suggested by the vestments worn by the High Priest while ministering the atonement. The High Priest was to put on what is called "the holy linen garments." (See Lev. 15:4) In Ezekiel 9, the one who is commanded to "mark a mark" in the foreheads of the men "that sigh and cry" is designated as "the man clothed in linen." (9:2; 10:2)
In detailing the ritual for the Day of Atonement, we observed that when the cleansing process reached the Altar of the Court, only the "uncleannessess" of the children of Israel was cleansed. This was accomplished with the High Priest "for himself and his house" and the blood of the Lord's goat. In this shadowy type, it must be kept in mind that the High Priest was prefiguring the work of Christ the Great High Priest. The book of Hebrews tells us that Christ is "a son over His own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end." (3:6) One must ask himself if the final cleansing at the Altar in the court was a prefiguring of the prophetic utterances found in Zephaniah 3:13 and Revelation 14:5.
The prophecy of Zechariah 3, also enters the picture. Here in symbolism, Joshua is clothed in filthy (unclean) garments. But Joshua does not remove them. They are removed by the attendants of the "Angel of the Lord." Then this "Angel" declares - "Behold I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with a change of raiment." (3:4) No work was to be done on the Day of Atonement; neither did Joshua work in the removal of the filthy garments. His part in this transaction was to consent - surrender to the Divine objective.
If there is, as it appears, a connection between the ministry at the Alter in the Court on the Day of Atonement and these prophecies noted above, then we must develop with caution the conclusion to
be drawn. Zephaniah says "the remnant of Israel shall do no iniquity" and the removal of "a deceitful tongue" finds its echo in Revelation 14:5. But to interpret the cleansing of "the uncleannesss" - the taking away of the filthy garment - as the removal of the fallen nature would invoke the theology of the Holy Flesh Movement. But then, if as is prefigured in the type, the cleansing of the record of sin and iniquity is accomplished in the Most Holy Place, then what does this "uncleanness" represent and when will it be done? Over this point, much prayerful study must be made, and conclusions drawn only as light comes from the Throne.
Page 4
DANIEL SEVEN
The seventh chapter of Daniel sheds light upon the final atonement when we relate it to the shadowy type of Leviticus 16, and helps us to see where we are in the progression of that Heavenly judgment. This key prophecy above all others in Daniel, gives us a sequence of symbols and imagery by which we can identify in history the "little horn." The attack on this prophecy today in the form of prophetic speculation is reprehensible. For individuals to profess "historic" Adventism, to promote the sales of "Spirit of Prophecy" books, such as Great Controversy, and then to undermine the force of this God-given prophecy in Daniel is to reveal themselves as the "agents" of Satan. Those who promote such "agents" have themselves become instruments of the evil one to confuse God's professed people.
Daniel, in a night vision saw four beasts arise in succession from the sea "diverse one from another." (7:2-3) The first was "like a lion, and had eagle's wings." (7:4) The identity of this beast, as can be shown both by Scripture and archeology, is Babylon. Jeremiah, a contemporary of both Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, used this same symbolism in describing Babylon's king. (Jer. 49:19, 22, 28) The lion was followed by the bear, leopard, and the non-descript beast. Out of the last beast with ten horns arose another "little horn" who plucked up three of the ten. It had the eyes of a man, and spake "great things." (7:8) It must be kept in mind that this "horn" never existed apart from the beast out which it arose. Its life and source of being was ever rooted in the non-descript beast.
The Powers which in succession followed Babylon were Medo-Persia, Grecia and Rome. Out of Rome and in the midst of the invading peoples who occupied the Roman Empire, there arose that unique power called the Papacy. It was to continue for "a time and times, and the dividing of time." (7:25) This would bring the sequence of the symbols as seen by Daniel down to 1798 A.D. From the earthly march of nations, Daniel's attention was then turned to the heavenly. He wrote - "I watched until the thrones were set up, and the Ancient of Days sat ... the court was set and the books were opened." (7:9-10 Heb.)
In the sequence of this prophecy, this "judgment scene" would follow 1798, and it did according to the next prophetic vision given to Daniel, in 1844. (8:14) But the setting of the judgment did not conclude the night of vision of Daniel 7. Two more events followed in the vision. He "beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake." He continued to see the history of the little horn "till" the beast [which nourished the horn] was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame." (7:11)
Before considering the "great words" which the horn spoke after 1844, we should note the comparative prophecy in Rev. 19:20, where the beast, also non-descript, (13:2) is with "the false prophet," cast alive into "a lake of fire." Then follows the 1000 years and the judgment of the Great White Throne, before whom the "dead" [the lost] stand as individuals. (20:11-12) Corporate bodies of earth through which Satan worked during time cease at the Second Advent. Following the 1000 years, the Devil no longer operating through "agents" leads the host of the lost in the final confrontation. (20:8)
Now we return to a consideration of the "great words" which the "horn" spake after 1844. In 1854, the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception was promulgated. This fact assures us that in the final conflict the doctrine of the Incarnation will play a vital role. In 1870, the Dogma of Papal Infallibility was affirmed by Vatican Council I. The issue of "authority" and what is true "authority" cannot be treated lightly in the end-time. Then in 1950, Pius XII made official dogma for the Catholic Church the teaching that Mary was received bodily into Heaven. (See diagram below)
In the prophetic sequence of Daniel 7, after Daniel hears the "great words," he sees "one like unto the Son of man" coming not to earth, but to the Ancient of Days to receive "dominion, and glory, and a kingdom" made up of "the saints of the most High." (7:13-14, 18) In this same night vision, Daniel
Page 5
was told that the Judgment renders a decision in favor of the "saints of the most High," and the time came for them to possess the kingdom. (7:22) Further, when the judgment shall sit, one of its objectives was to take away "the dominion" of the horn, and "to consume and destroy it unto the end." (7:26)
How shall we harmonize the shadowy type of Leviticus 16, and the prophetic sequence of Daniel 7? On the typical Day of Atonement, the first entry of blood into the Most Holy Place was by the High Priest, not only for himself, but "for his house." (16:11) Then came the blood of the Lord's goat by the same High Priest. This was defined as necessary "because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins." (16:16) But the "uncleanness" was not cleansed until the final act at the Altar in the court where both the blood of the bullock and goat were mingled. It was at this Altar that the daily service for the individual provided forgiveness because through the blood of the sin offering confession was made, and the fact that the penalty had been paid was recorded by the placing of the blood on the horns of that Altar.
The prophetic symbolism of Daniel 7 fits the picture of Christ coming to the Ancient of Days having completed the cleansing of the "saints" of their uncleanness. Thus the "saints" can possess the Kingdom through "the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" - God's grace in providing it, and Jesus' willingness, as Isaac's, to be "the propitiation." (Rom. 3:24-25)
The "great words" which began with a dogma concerning Mary, closed with a dogma concerning her in 1950. The events - both secular and within the Church - which took place at that date and since, take on a new significance for those who wish to walk in the light from the Throne. ( I John 1:7)
Consider the following data, now a matter of history. The World Council of Churches was formed in 1948. Israel was re-established a State the same year. An 1949, Bible Readings for the Home Circle was revised, and the doctrine of the Incarnation was the first doctrine to be altered. It was followed by other doctrinal changes in succeeding decades culminating in the adoption of the 27 Fundamental Statements of Belief in 1980. In 1950, Wieland and Short made their original presentation to the General Conference on the infiltration of Baal worship into the Seventh-day Adventist Church. (See original manuscript - 1888 Re-Examined as reproduced in A Warning and Its Reception.) In 1952, a world-wide Bible Conference held in the Sligo Park Church discussed the significance of Luke 21:24. It has since been fulfilled. (See manuscript - The Times of the Gentiles Fulfilled.) All of this must now be understood and harmonized for the time has come for the saints to possess the kingdom. "The hour has come, the hour is striking, and striking at you, the hour and the end!" (Eze. 7:6-7 Moffatt)
DANIEL 8:14
The KJV reads "Unto two thousand and three hundred days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." We have, therefore, associated this verse with the Day of Atonement, and have concluded that following the culmination of the 2300 days in 1844, the ministry of Christ would begin in the Heavenly Reality as prefigured in the type. However, the Hebrew Masoretic text reads sadaq in the Niphal or passive form and means "to be justified or vindicated." (Gesenius) It is obvious that should the Masoretic text stand without challenge, it would be difficult to associate Daniel 8:14 with Leviticus 16.
The Septuagint (LXX) a Greek translation of the Old Testament older than the manuscripts on which the Masoretic Hebrew text is based reads - "shall be cleansed" - using the future passive form of katharizo. Here there is a connection with Leviticus 16 for the same word is used twice in verse 30, once as an infinitive, and once using the same passive form as in Daniel 8:14. The Douay Bible following the Latin word used in the Vulgate -- mundabitur - reads also, shall be cleansed."
How can the difference between the Hebrew text and the LXX and Vulgate translations of the Old Testament be reconciled in regard to Daniel 8:14? Hebrew scholars have long held that the Hebrew portions of Daniel (1-2:4a; 8-12) were translated. from Aramaic originals. This hypothesis was confirmed by the studies of Zimmermann in 1938 and 1939. Building on this, Dr. H. Louis Ginsberg, Sabato Morais Professor of Bible at The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, stated the Aramaic for Daniel 8:14 would read - "the sanctuary will become clean (or be cleansed)" He maintains that the Hebrew text which led to the Masoretic use of sadaq (to be justified) was a very poor rendering of the Aramaic by the translator. (See his Studies in Daniel, pp. 41-42, 79-80) Thus in all three languages, the language in which Daniel wrote, and the Greek and Latin translations of that text, the KJV is confirmed.
Both the LXX and the Vulgate use the future passive - "the sanctuary shall be cleansed" - to render the thought of the Aramaic. The end of the 2300 days in 1844, therefore marks the beginning of the process which shall end in a cleansed sanctuary. Daniel 7 outlines the events to be fulfilled on earth during the Heavenly judgment before the Ancient of Days. A continuum is noted "The Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom." (7:22)
We are now at the end of the period as outlined in Daniel 7. The devil would rob us of the certainty of the truth committed in sacred trust to the Advent Movement by seeking to destroy the fundamental pillars of the sanctuary doctrine as based in the shadowy types and prophecies of the Old Testament. The simple refining of our perceptions of the truth leaves unmoved the basic foundation.
Page 6
The Blending of the Light
What relationship is, there between "the judgment was set" in Daniel 7, "the sanctuary shall be cleansed" in Daniel 8, and the typical Day of Atonement in Leviticus 16? It should be obvious that there is a relationship between Daniel 7 and 8. The prophecies are parallel. When one understands the textual background for Daniel 8:14, and the parallel choice of words in the LXX between Daniel 8:14 and Leviticus 16:30, one can sense there is a relationship there. But what is the relationship between Daniel 7 and Leviticus 16? This is not so obvious. Yet the sanctuary doctrine as understood by the Seventh-day Adventist Church in the past decades stands or falls over this relationship. It is our failure to come to grips with this issue that has given cause for the assaults which the "new theology" advocates have made against the sanctuary teaching.
Our failure to recognize the distinct differences between the prophecy of Daniel 7 and the typical ritual of Leviticus 16 has not helped the cause of truth. Daniel 7 does reveal a "judgment," definitely pre-Advent, before which the "little horn" power is arraigned. This arraignment is before the assembled hosts of Heaven. (Dan. 7:9-10) On the other hand, the typical services of the sanctuary were connected with a covenant. The covenant is primary; the services secondary. The text in Hebrews does not say "The worldly sanctuary with its ordinances of divine service had also connected with it a covenant." (See Heb. 9:1) It was the covenant which had "also" the sanctuary with its services. Just so, Jesus as "the mediator of a better covenant" is also "a minister of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man." (See Heb. 8:6, 2)
The "judgment" of Daniel 7 involves the whole problem of sin and the key players in that problem, while the shadowy ritual of the earthly sanctuary tells how a covenant people must relate to the provision for sin to escape the condemnation of the judgment.
It must be kept clearly in mind that the "little horn" of Daniel 7 is continued in symbolism in Revelation by the first "beast" of Chapter 13, and by the "woman in scarlet" in Chapter 17. Through these symbolisms, runs a continuous thread - "the dragon gave [the beast] his power, and his seat, and great authority." (Rev. 13:2) The final dictum upon "spiritual Babylon" is that "in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth." (Rev. 18:4) The "little horn" stands in the judgment as the embodiment of all wickedness and the symbol of rebellion against God. "The man of sin" in II Thess. 2, another designation of the "little horn", is noted as "the Wicked." (ver.8) The Greek is anomos defined by Thayer as "he in whom all iniquity has as it were fixed its abode." (Greek-English Lexicon of the NT, p. 48)
In the book of Hebrews, the message which God speaks "unto us in a Son" (Heb.1:2 Gr.) is that having become "in all things like unto His brethren that He might be a merciful and faithful high priest" (2:17), He is first "a son over His own house."(3:6) Then seated as "a priest upon His throne" (Zech. 6:13), He dispenses mercy and "grace to help in time of need." (4:16) This is His first apartment ministry in the Heavenly Sanctuary.
But what happens when the judgment is set and the books are opened before the Ancient of Days? Here the ritual agenda of Leviticus 16 provides the detail. The first entry with blood into the Most Holy Place on the day of Atonement was by the High Priest with the blood of a bullock which was for himself and "for his house." Not only is Jesus "the Lord's goat" but He also "offered Himself." (Heb. 9:14) Thus the dual entry on the Day of Atonement with "cleansing blood."
The agenda of Leviticus further indicates that the atonement of the Most Holy Place is necessitated "because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins." (16:16) however, no blood of any sin offering ever reached the Most Holy Place during the yearly ritual, but the sins and transgressions of the children of Israel had been recorded in "the books." What was to be done?
The judgment must begin where and over what sin began. Sin began at the Throne of God and over the creation of man. The creation plan intended man to be only "a little while inferior to the angels." (Heb. 2:7 margin) But in sin man fell even lower than the "inferior" position. Now can God bring an end to sin, and carry out His original plan and none of the angelic host become jealous as did Lucifer? The judgment is set in the presence of that assembled host. (Dan. 7:10) Jesus coming with His sacrifice asks not only pardon full and complete for His covenant people, but a seat upon His throne. Was His sacrifice sufficient to grant this request?
Page 7
The next step of the agenda was the blood of the Lord's goat. This was God's sacrifice. (See Gen. 22:8) Here the lots had been cast, a choice had been made. Standing in the Court was the other goat, representing Azazel.
Could God roll back on him the sins of His Son's "house"? Again the assembled host must respond, for they, too, had cast their lot, made their choice. Was the cost of Calvary sufficient so that God having paid the price could do with "sins" as He so chooses?
Another question must be settled. What about the "uncleanness" of the "children of Israel?" In the agenda of the ritual service, this was the last act of the atonement.
(Lev. 16:19-20) Is the "decree" for the removal of the uncleanness then entered to be carried out at the time indicated in Daniel 7:13-14?
The second phase of the ritual agenda was concerning the registry on the horns of the Altar of Burnt Incense. Here has been made during the year the record of corporate confession. In Daniel 7, none could be found for the "little horn." Of this "horn" under the symbolism of "Jezebel," Jesus declared, "I gave her space to repent ... and she repented not." (Rev. 2:21) the "horn" and all corporate bodies who have not repented during the time allotted for repentance are at this point in the judgment declared "found wanting." In the time sequence of Daniel 7, this would occur just prior to the coming of the Son of man to the Ancient of Days to receive His kingdom of "saints" - holy ones made holy by His cleansing.
The agenda next indicates a third phase of judgment. In the Levitical ritual, the final atonement involved a cleansing of the confession of guilt registered on the horns of the Altar in the court. Here in the daily service the individual only was involved. No blood was carried into the sanctuary recording the fact that confession had been made and the penalty paid. The common priest had eaten of the victim. He carried the record in himself. So likewise, Jesus as a common priest having in all things been "made like unto his brethren" offered the sacrifice of Himself and all who place their full dependence in Him are carried in Him. They do not come into judgment but pass from death into life. (See John 5:24, Gr.) In the typical ritual, the High Priest went in for the people, none even entered the court.
Having completed His work of cleansing, Jesus comes before the Ancient of Days to ask for His kingdom, and His people who have made a covenant with Him by sacrifice. And the Ancient of Days, declares, "Granted." All the host that witnessed the Judgment declare with a loud voice - "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessing." (Rev. 5:12)
The "agenda" of the Judgment as revealed in the shadowy type gives us a clue as to where we are in the stream of time. It is after the corporate phase, the individual cleansing begins. According to Jesus' own prophecy, the times or probation of the nations (corporate bodies) would end with the fulfilling of the sign spoken of in Luke 21:24. This has occurred. This projects for our thinking some interesting questions:
1) Is the "man clothed in linen" (Eze. 9:2-4) now sealing those among the professed house of Israel who have and are afflicting their souls, trusting not in their own works - doing "no work in that same day"? (Lev. 23:28) Do these become in the final hour "His own house" cleansed as represented by the mingled blood of the bullock and the Lord's goat at the Altar of the Court? Do these become marked with the mark of redemption, "the sign of the cross of Calvary"?
2) Has the "man in linen" reported back to the One on the Throne saying - "I have done as thou has commanded me." (Eze. 9:11) Are we at the time when from the Throne will come the command to the "man clothed in linen" to "take coals from between the cherubim" so as to do for His "marked" people as was done for Isaiah? "Eze. 10:1-2; 6-7. See also Isa. 6:6-7, compare with Rev. 14:5)
The sanctuary teaching is not a "stale, flat, and unprofitable" doctrine, but vibrant with meaning for this very hour. A fuller understanding of Daniel 7, and its interrelationship with the agenda of Leviticus 16 challenges us today, even as the prophecy of Daniel 8:14 challenged those who perceived that prophecy as pointing to the beginning of the hour of God's judgment in 1844. "Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart. Rejoice in the Lord, ye righteous; and give thanks to the memory of His sanctuary." (Ps. 97:11-12, margin)
*****
"The Lord has made His people the repository of sacred truth. Upon every individual who has had the light of present truth devolves the duty of developing that truth on a higher scale than it has hitherto been done."
Ellen G. White
|