WHAT REALLY HAPPENED IN 1844

By: Martin Eldon

Email: martinthezman@hotmail.com

Web-site: www.babylonforsaken.com

1st Printing Sept. 2003

All Scripture is taken from the King James Bible unless otherwise noted.

ASV – American Standard Version

BBE – The Bible in Basic English

DBY – Darby Bible

GNB – Good News Bible

GWTB – God’s Word

JPS – Jewish Publication Society Bible

NCV – New Century Version

NLT – New Living Translation

LXX – Septuagint

RSV – Revised Standard Version

RV – Revised Version

WEY – Weymouths Translation

YLT – Youngs Literal Translation

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED IN 1844?

How shall we explain the doctrine of 1844 that has changed so much over the years in the mind of the Adventist Denomination? I will give but a short summary for the details would take pages and pages, which I will not devote to this particular study. But the reader if he wishes to see the greater of details can read my article that is entitled ‘The Shut Door’*. Here is the summary. A Baptist Preacher named William Miller preached that Jesus Christ would return to gather His saints and to destroy the earth in the year 1843. He preached this message mostly in the North Eastern United States, though the message had its followers in small numbers in the West and South. It also reached up into Canada, and to a portion of Europe. He based his calculation upon 15 points of prophecy, the most significant being the ‘2300 days’ of Daniel chapter eight. When Jesus did not return in 1843, William Miller recalculated his findings, and said the Lord would definitely return in October of 1844. Those of you familiar with Gods word can see that Mr. Miller was teaching contrary to the instructions of Christ; for Christ had warned us that no man knows the day of His return. Jesus also plainly stated that He would not return till the gospel was published in all nations. The continent of Africa, India, the Middle East and China had not yet received the word of God. If Mr. Miller had heeded the warning of Jesus, he would not have preached a message with the exact date of Christ’s return.

In 1844, there were about 50,000 in North America who believed that Jesus indeed was returning that October. History bares witness that Christ did not return, and when the day came and passed most of these people returned to their nominal churches. Even William Miller himself finally admitted that he was wrong, and that no prophecy was fulfilled in the year of 1844. Yet there were a few in the Advent movement who would not admit their mistake; they held that something had indeed happened in 1844. Jesus didn’t come to the earth, but He entered into the ‘Most Holy Place’ of the Heavenly Sanctuary; where He would do His final work of ‘cleansing’ for His Saints, but the poor sinner and backslider and the Christian who heard Miller’s message, and did not accept it were forever shut out from the mercy of GOD. O.R.L. Crosier (who later admitted his doctrine was in error) was the first to print this view, which was substantiated by the “visions” of Hiram Edison and one Ellen White. With this a new date for Christ’s return was given, and that was the year 1851. Again history bares witness that Jesus did not return in that year either; so their doctrine was again modified. They then began to teach that all those who heard the message of Miller and rejected it were eternally lost, but every one else could be saved, IF they believe that in 1844 that Jesus entered the Most Holy Place to begin making atonement for the transgression of his people, or in other words the person had to believe that no sin was blotted out of the heavenly record books until 1844. They taught those who did not acknowledge this and tried to pray to God, were actually praying to Satan {DS, March 14, 1846 par. 1}.

Dear reader, I would hope that these men and women were sincere in their beliefs when they spread this message, but unfortunately as sincere as they may have been they were sincerely wrong. I can come to no other conclusion; yet there are so many who have placed their faith in a group of people who would not admit that the message they taught was wrong, and they sincerely believe that 1844 was the greatest event in the plan of Salvation since the day of Pentecost! It is to them, and to all who wish to know the truth about this doctrine that I write this. I am sure there are going to be people who simply

from reading the introduction, will be ready to lay this study down and call it a work of Satan. I ask you dear reader to read this article through, pull out your Bible and your Bible alone and pray that GOD will show you the truth from His Word. My friend if you interpret the Bible through the writings of Sister White, then you are no better than the Catholic who must interpret the Bible through their church tradition. I pray that you will be a Berean, and that you are noble enough toward GOD that you will be willing to study and see if these things that I write are so.

*See Appendix A

WHICH ROOM OF THE SANCTUARY DID JESUS ASCEND TO?

Before we begin this section I would like to explain that I am indeed a believer in the heavenly sanctuary and the work of Jesus Christ as our High Priest, which is essential to the salvation of man. These things are not questionable to the Bible believer. Yet I am certain that the Adventist Doctrine, which teaches that Jesus did not enter the Most Holy Room of the Heavenly Sanctuary until the year 1844 is a dangerous false doctrine that is not based upon the Bible. I believe the Bible is very clear on the subject of where Jesus Christ ascended; He ascended into the heavens to sit at the right hand of GOD. He is now in the heavenly temple or sanctuary making intercession for His children. To understand this heavenly temple we can simply look at the scale model, which is the earthly sanctuary. The earthly sanctuary consisted of two rooms, the first called the holy place, which contained the lamp stand, the table of shewbread, and the altar of incense. The second which is called the Most Holy Place or the Holiest of All, contained the ark of the covenant (which held the 10 commandments), which had the mercy seat above it, and was overshadowed by two angels. Most will readily agree that the Mercy Seat represents the throne of GOD. Thus if Christ ascended to the right hand of GOD, to appear in His presence for us, then He entered the Most Holy Place.

Yet there are those who believe and teach that Christ did not enter the Most Holy Place at His ascension, but only recently entered there. They tell us the throne was moved into the first compartment until 1844, when it was moved back into the Most Holy Place.

The question is dear reader, does the Bible support such a doctrine? Let us investigate; the chief point made in the book of Hebrews is the fact that Christ as our High Priest is at the right hand of God’s throne.

"Now in the things we are saying, the chief point is this: We have such a high priest, who sat down on the right hand of the throne of the majesty in the heavens, a minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man." Hebrews 8:1 (RSV)

The next question is, which apartment of the heavenly sanctuary contains the throne of God? Which apartment is the "throne room" of Jehovah?

In the Mosaic sanctuary, the pattern of the true tabernacle, the throne of God abode in the second apartment, which is seen in the following verses.

"Let them make me a tabernacle that I may dwell among them." Exodus 25:8.

"And thou shalt put the mercy seat ABOVE UPON THE ARK, and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony which I shall give thee. And THERE will I meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubims which are UPON THE ARK of the testament, of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel." Exodus 25:21-23.

Inasmuch as the Mosaic tabernacle was a shadow of the heavenly sanctuary, it follows that the "throne-room" of God in the heavenly sanctuary is in the second apartment.

How do the SDA teachers explain this undeniable truth? They simply teach that throne was moved to the first room when Christ ascended. Now think dear reader, if GOD’s throne, which was established above the Ark of the Covenant was moved, then the Most Holy Place was left empty, void of all furniture for 1800 years. This is not biblical and this also does violence to the type by putting all the furniture of the heavenly sanctuary in one apartment and leaving the Holy of Holies empty.

Other Adventist teachers have suggested that God left the Ark of the Covenant in the Most Holy Place, as He set in the first room of the sanctuary for 1800 years. This idea brings up several valid questions; which Brother Ballenger posed in his book “Cast out for the cross of Christ” 1909, I will repeat his questions.

“1st. If God moved His throne into the first apartment at the ascension of Christ, and left the sacred ark enshrining His law and covered by themercy seat, did He move the center of salvation away from the law and mercy seat into another apartment?

2nd. Did God minister pardon for eighteen centuries from a throne which was not the mercy seat but which was separated from that mercy seat by a separating veil?

3rd. Did God minister the gospel for eighteen centuries from a seat whose foundation was not his eternal law, from a throne which was divorced from that law by a veil of separation?

4th. Did God pardon sin from another seat than the one which is the habitation of justice and judgment?

5th. If God could minister the gospel for eighteen centuries divorced from the law, why can He not continue to do it; as taught by the No-Law advocates?

6th. Did Christ as High Priest plead His blood for eighteen centuries before a throne whose foundation was not the broken law which demanded the transgressor's blood?

7th. Did Christ minister His blood before a throne where mercy and truth did not meet together, and where righteousness and peace did not kiss each other?

Does the reader not see that this doctrine which moves the throne from the Holy of Holies into the first apart-ment, divorces God and His Son from the mercy seat and the law, and changes the center of God's government and gospel from the mercy-covered law in the

Holy of Holies to the first apartment which according to the type never contained either law or mercy seat; and that for a period of eighteen hundred years?” (IBID)

WHERE IS THE THRONE IN THE BOOK OF REVELATION

An attempt is often made by SDA theologians to find scriptural proof that Christ sat upon the throne with His Father in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary until 1844. The Scriptures that they use are the following:

"And behold there was a throne set in heaven and one sitting upon the throne. . . And there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne." Revelation 4:2,5. R.V.

"And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne." Revelation 8:3

It is argued by SDA theologians, that inasmuch as the candlestick and the altar of incense were articles of the first apartment of the earthly sanctuary, then John had to be peering into the first compartment of the heavenly sanctuary; and in that first compartment, he saw the throne of GOD!

Yet this conclusion isn’t necessary; one may just as consistently argue that since the ark or the typical abode of the throne was always in the second apartment, then the altar and candlestick had to be moved into the second compartment since John saw all three at the same time. Yet both of these explanations are faulty.No doubt the candlestick and altar were in the exact position they occupied in Moses’ Sanctuary, and the throne was in its exact position also. For the Candle stick and the altar were always considered to abide “Before the ark” or throne. "the golden altar for incense before the ark" (Exodus 40:5).

The reader now may ask, how could John see both the throne and the altar at the same time, since there is a veil that separates the two rooms? For the simple reason, when Christ died the veil of the earthly temple was torn in two, to symbolize the rending of the heavenly veil; so that the Great High Priest may enter through the veil with his own blood; to appear in the presence of GOD for us. And now dear reader we must not think that the Church of Christ had been separated from the throne of Grace for 1800 years by a thick curtain; but rather WE HAVE FREE ACCESS to the throne, through the person of Christ Jesus.

Hebrews 4:16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

Hebrews 10:19-23 ¶ Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; And having an high priest over the house of God; Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)

DOES HEBREWS TEACH JESUS ENTERED THE SECOND COMPARTMENT

The casual reader of the book of Hebrews will quickly see that the writer taught that Christ entered the Most Holy place at His ascension; yet the supporters of the 1844 doctrine tell us that if we look at the ‘Greek’ in the book of Hebrews we will see that He merely entered the first compartment. I would like for you dear friend to see if this is so… Does the Greek support this doctrine, or does it teach that Christ entered the Most Holy Place at His ascension?

The first thing we must do is to become familiar with the Greek word Hagia.

The greek term ‘hagia’ (ayia or ayiou) which means ‘holy’ can refer to the Sanctuary, or to either one of the individual rooms of the Sanctuary. One must read the context to determine which the word is referring to. Here are all the uses of this word in the book of Hebrews

Heb 9:1 Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary (hagia/ayiou).

Heb 9:2 For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary (Hagia/ayia).

Heb 9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place (Hagia/ayia), having obtained eternal redemption for us. .

Heb 9:24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places (Hagia/ayia) made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

Heb 9:25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place (Hagia/ayia) every year with blood of others;

Heb 13:11 The chief priest brings the blood of animals into the holy place (hagia/ayia) as an offering for sin. But the bodies of those animals were burned outside the Israelite camp.

Yet there is a ‘plural’ form of this word ‘hagia’, that is used as a plural of majesty in reference to the ‘extremely’ holy things of GOD. The form of this word is ‘ta hagia or ayiwv’. It is the name that was given specifically to the inner compartment of the sanctuary, since it is called the “Most holy place”. It is used in the following places.

Hebrews 9:7-8 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: The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all (Ta hagia/ayiwv) was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:

Hebrews 9:3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all (Ta hagion/ayiwv);

*NOTE: The term Holiest of All is translated from two Greek words “hagia Tahagia” which literally reads holy of holies. Some people take the fact that this is the only place in the book of Hebrews this phrase is used and they try to teach people that this is the only reference in the whole book of Hebrews to the Second Compartment, this is poor

reasoning, There were two popular names for the second compartment among the Jews “the Holy of Holies” and “The Most Holy”, either phrase is in reference to the second apartment. The 1844 advocate’s explanation is similar to saying, “Because Jesus called himself “The Son of GOD”, when He said, “The Son of Man” he was referring to someone else”. This is not reasonable.

Hebrews 10:19-20 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest (Ta-hagion/ayiwv) by the blood of Jesus, By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;

This is also backed by the Septuagint, which used ‘ta-hagia’ repeatedly in the Old Testament to refer to the inner Sanctuary, or the Most Holy Place (see Exodus 26:33-34, 1st Kings 8:6,8)

This is also proven by the fact that all three of these New Testament references for “ta-hagion/ayiwv” are clearly in reference to the Most Holy Place.

Hebrews Nine verse three being the most clearest for it tells us that it exists ‘after the second veil’

Hebrews 9:7-8 also MUST refer to the Most holy place for it is contrasting the continual sacrifices of the common priests with the special yearly work of the High Priest, which he did alone once every year. As we know this as with most of chapter nine of Hebrews is speaking of the Jewish Feast Yom-kipper or the Day of Atonement; which was the ONLY time the High Priest would enter the Most Holy Place.

Hebrews 10:19-20 is also plainly in reference to the Most Holy Place; for it is ‘through the veil’ which represented the flesh of Jesus Christ. When Jesus’ flesh was torn in death, the veil of the most holy place was torn in two.

And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom. Mark 15:38

This is agreed upon by all Bible commentaries; yet we will quote only a few. “When the loud cry, "It is finished," came from the lips of Christ the priests were officiating in the Temple… With a rending noise the inner veil of the Temple is torn from top to bottom by an unseen hand, throwing open to the gaze of the multitude a place once filled with the presence of God. In this place the Shekinah had dwelt. (The Desire of Ages, pp. 756, 757).

“And the veil of the temple was rent in two from the top to the bottom. The veil was the heavy curtain which hung between the holy and the most holy places in the sanctuary. By shutting out from the most holy place all persons except the high priest, who alone was permitted to pass through it, and this only once in the year, it signified that the way into the holiest—that is, into heaven—was not yet made manifest while the first tabernacle was standing (#Heb 9:7,8). But the moment that Jesus died, thus making the way manifest, the veil was appropriately rent in twain from top to bottom, disclosing the most holy place to the priests who were at that time offering the evening incense in the holy place. (TFG 731)

The term ‘through the veil’ is an old Hebrew idiom that denotes the entrance into the Most Holy Place. Everywhere the terms ‘within the veil’ (See Exodus 26:33,

Leviticus 16:2, 12, 15 and Numbers 18:7) and ‘without the veil’ is used in scriptures (See Exodus 26:35, 27:21, 40:22, Leviticus 24:3) it refers to the Veil of the Most Holy Place. With this we will attempt to prove our point.

In Hebrews 6:19-20, we have the following statement concerning Christ: "Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil; whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an High Priest forever after the order of Melchisedec."

This Scripture says plainly that at the time the Hebrew letter was written, Christ had entered "within the veil." Now, to which of the two apartments does this term refer? It will be noticed that the apostle refers to this place "within the veil" as if it were a place perfectly familiar to the readers. He does not stop to define it, but passes on, taking it for granted that the term is familiar to them. As we have seen this familiar term denotes the passage of a High Priest into the Most Holy Place. Yet we have teachers who say Christ did not enter through the veil into the Most Holy Place at his ascension, but rather 1800 years later. How do they explain this clear text? They tell us that “Within the veil” refers to entering the door of the first compartment. The only Scripture in all the Bible that is used to prove that the term "within the veil" refers to the first apartment, or within the curtain which formed the door of the tabernacle, is the Scripture found in Hebrews 9:3. Paul, here, in describing the Mosaic temple says: "And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the holiest of all."

These teachers tell us that the first compartment also had a veil, and it is into this veil that Christ entered, because Paul did not explain that Christ had entered into the ‘second veil’. But my dear readers, Paul did not state that Christ entered into the “First Veil” either. Paul did not attempt to explain ‘which veil’ for the term ‘within the veil’ was well known terminology among the Hebrews; and it always referred to the veil of the Most Holy Place. The Holy Spirit did not signify the “Second Veil” in Mark 15:38 when referring to the veil of the Most Holy for the same reason. Also please note that the door of the first compartment, though it was made with a veil, is never called ‘the veil’ in the Hebrew scriptures but always the door of the tabernacle (See Exodus 29:4,11,32, 42). Thus the terms “within the veil” and “Through the veil” have but one biblical meaning, and that is entrance into the Most Holy Place.

Now again let us examine these verses and see if they do not clearly declare that Christ had entered the Most Holy Place before the letter of the Hebrews was written.

Hebrews 9:7-8 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: The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all (Ta hagia/ayiwv) was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:

Again we are told that the once a year visit of the High Priest into the Most Holy Place signified that the way to enter into the true holiest place was not yet made. But then Paul explains that Christ made the way.

Hebrews 9:11-12 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

Further Paul tells us that through the blood and torn body of Jesus, which is the New and Living way, we can enter, without fear, into the Most Holy Place.

Hebrews 10:19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest (Ta hagia/ayiwv) by the blood of Jesus, By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; And having an high priest over the house of God;

Hebrews 6:19-20 Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil; Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

Clearly Christ Jesus entered within the veil, into the Most Holy Place, to the right hand of GOD at His ascension.

THEN WHAT DID THE FIRST ROOM OF THE SANCTUARY REPRESENT?

Some of you may be asking: “If Christ ascended directly into the Most Holy Place, then what was the purpose of the first compartment? What did it foreshadow?” The First Room of the Sanctuary represented the daily ministration of Christ before the cross; where Christ mediated for the sinner, and the sinner was forgiven, and the sin was credited to Jesus by faith. But though the sin was credited to Jesus, there could be no atonement for that sin, until Jesus paid the price of that sin by His death; which the Day of Atonement represents.

The daily work of the priest in the first room of the earthly Sanctuary where the sinner brought their offering and confessed their sins during the year were but a channel of faith through which they acknowledged their sin, and expressed their faith in the coming Lamb of God, who would die to take away their sin. The sin was then symbolically transferred from the sinner to the sanctuary, which represented Jesus receiving credit for the sin in the Heavenly Sanctuary; with the promise that He would one day atone for it. We will now quote A.F Ballenger who has illustrated it this way.

ILLUSTRATING THE DISTINCTION.

“Let me illustrate the relation which the atonement for the sinner, which was made during the year sustained to the atonement for iniquity which was made on the Day of Atonement. We will say that I am renting a house in Ballymoney, Ireland, from a Mr. Hanna. Let it be supposed that I am unable to pay my rent, and am therefore in distress. I am anxious to leave for America, but Mr. Hanna brings suit against me, and levies upon my goods. In my distress, my friend, Mr. McClelland, steps up and says: "Mr. Hanna, charge the two pounds which Mr. Ballenger owes you, to me. I will pay it on the first of next June. Let Mr. Ballenger go to America." Mr. Hanna, perfectly satisfied with my substitute, transfers my debt from myself to Mr. McClelland, and says to me, "Mr.

Ballenger, you are free to go. I hold Mr. McClelland in your stead." Mr. Hanna and I are now one. An atonement has been made for me which has reconciled me to Mr. Hanna, Reader, cannot you see that when Mr. Hanna accepted Mr. McClelland as my substitute in that acceptance an atonement is made for me, I am free from the debt? But the reader will recognize that no atonement has yet been made for the debt. The debt has not been paid. Mr. McClelland, my substitute, has assumed the debt, and Mr. Hanna has accepted him in my place, but he has not yet paid the debt. This payment will not be made until the 1st of June.And so, during the four thousand years, from creation to the cross, the sinner is pardoned but the sin is not atoned for until the day when it is laid upon the Lamb of God. "He hath laid upon him the iniquity of us all." "Behold, the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world."

Inasmuch as God forgave the sinner from creation to Calvary, and did not inflict the penalty of the sinner's sin, either on the sinner or his substitute, it follows that God's throne and his sanctuary have assumed the respons-ibility of man's sin.

Thus it was in the sanctuary service during the year. The sinner brought his sin offering, which was merely a channel through which he confessed his sin, and expressed his faith in the death of Christ yet to come. By his faith he was made to realize a oneness with God; but his sin, in type, still defiled the sanctuary until the day of atonement. On this great day, the service was changed. The Lord did not leave the sinner to choose the offering, but he chose the offering himself. He did not permit the sinner to lay his hands upon the head of this goat, for this was not the goat which was a channel for the faith of the repentant, believing sinner; but this goat was the one victim of the year which symbolized, from God's stand-point, His giving His only Son to die to atone for the sins of the world. The offerings during the year symbolized man's accepting, by faith, God's offering for sin; but this one offering on the day of atonement symbolized God's giving His Son to be the sin-offering for the world. And, inasmuch as He, God, laid upon him, Christ, the iniquities of us all, it was not fitting for the sinner to lay his hands upon this, the Lord's goat. By keeping in mind this clear distinction between the purpose of the daily offerings, and the offering on the day of atonement the whole sanctuary system becomes clear and plain.

HALTING CHRIST "BEFORE THE VEIL."

Mr. Ballenger continues: “When we stop our great High Priest in the first apartment for more than 1800 years, we not only violate the type, which required that the high priest should pass, with the blood of the Lord's goat, immediately into the holy of holies; but, by placing him before the veil for all those centuries, we put him in the position of the priest against whom was charged the accumulated sins of the people, and who was awaiting the death of the day of atonement, whereby he was to unload his burden of sin. But why load up our Savior again with the very same sins with which he was already burdened when he suffered on Calvary's cross? Must he bear the same sins twice? If, after his ascension, he is again laden, in the first apartment, with the sins of the world, will not he have to die again to meet the penalty of these sins? But this is impossible, for the Apostle Paul says in the 6th of Rom.: "Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead, dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him: For in that he died, he died unto sin once; but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God."

“Christ is no longer the sin-bearer. All the sins he ever will bear, he bore on Calvary's cross. If he were still laden with sin, he would still have to minister before the veil, and he could not enter into the presence of God, and sit down with him on his throne. It was not until he had purged our sins in his death, that he was allowed to pass into the presence of God, and sit down on his throne.

"When he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high." Heb. 1:3. "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God." Heb. 10:12.

“But the objection may be raised: When the sinner sins today, and confesses his sin, does not Jesus Christ load that sin upon himself? God forbid. That sin was already borne by him on the cross of Calvary, and all he needs to do is to raise that pierced hand, and plead that he has already borne that sin to Calvary, and paid its debt in his death. If he again loads himself up with sin, then he must offer himself again, and if he offers himself again, he must suffer again. "Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year, with the blood of others. For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world, but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. Heb. 9:25-26.

“When a crime is committed in a state, the government is responsible for the purging away of that crime; and though the criminal may be already tried and sentenced to death, yet the government has not purged itself of this crime until it has inflicted the penalty of the law on the transgressor. In like manner, so long as God has pardoned the sinner, but has not inflicted the penalty of the sinner's sin upon his Son, the sanctuary in heaven was responsible for the putting away of that sin. So Abel was forgiven and went free, and thousands of years before the debt was paid, he was resting in his grave, God having transferred his sin to his substitute. God was holding Abel for the sin no longer. Yet it was not met in Christ's death until four thousand years later.

“Year after year, during these centuries, the sins of men were accumulating in the sanctuary above, and God became responsible for them, and they were charged against his Son. But there came a day of reckoning, when the promise of the Son to pay the debt must be fulfilled. At that time we see Jesus Christ, with the accumulated sins of the centuries, which God had laid upon him, groaning under the load on Calvary, and paying the penalty of the world's sin in his own death. But not only did he suffer under the load of sins of the past, but he suffered for the sins of the future. "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down at the right hand of God." Heb. 10:12. And when he hangs dead on Calvary's cross, he is free from sin for he that is dead is freed from sin. Christ raised from the dead, stands in the position of the high priest, when on the day of atonement, he held in his hand the blood of the Lord's goat.

“And why, I ask again, should we stop our great High Priest for more than 1800 years in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary, there to receive upon himself again the accumulation of sins which he has already borne in his death on Calvary?

“And thus, we see that the ministry in the first apartment of the Mosaic sanctuary, was a perfect type of the ministry on behalf of the sinner from creation to the cross, during which time the sins of men were actually accumulating in the heavenly sanctuary. Again the day of atonement in Israel was a perfect type of the actual putting away of sin, on

which day the sins of men which had accumulated in the sanctuary were met in type by the blood of the Lord's goat. So on the great day of atonement, God laid upon his Son the iniquity of us all; the accumulated iniquity of the centuries, and the Lamb bore them, and paid their penalty in his death. Nothing is clearer than that the day of atonement began with the death of Christ. The Lord's goat, typifying Christ's death, was slain on the day of atonement; consequently Christ, in order to be the antitype, must himself be slain on the day of atonement.” CAST OUT FOR THE CROSS OF CHRIST by Albion F. Ballenger, 1909

DOES THE BLOOD OF JESUS DEFILE?

OUR DAY OF ATONEMENT

Hebrews 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

The writer of Hebrews tells us that according to the scriptures, almost all things are to be cleansed with blood. My friend this is not speaking of a physical cleaning; you would not want to wash your clothes in blood would you? No this is speaking of spiritual and ceremonial cleansings; for the verse tells us “Without the shedding of blood there is no remission” or Forgiveness.

You may not think of blood as a cleansing agent, but when it comes to the filth of the soul, there is no other solution. The Bible teaches us that we have all sinned, and have worn the filthy garments of our sins (Zechariah 3:3). Every one who doesn’t know Jesus Christ as their personal Savior stands in the same condition as the priest Joshua, of whom the Bible says stood before the angel in filthy rags. What does the Bible teach soils our apparel?

Jude 1:23 And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.

The works of the flesh, which is sin, discolors our garments; with one blot we become wholly unfit to enter the Kingdom of God. To the so called ‘good people’ who do not know Jesus, GOD says “your righteousness is as filthy rags”. And one day these ‘good people’ who have thought they were not in need of a cleansing shall hear the fearful words, “I know thee not”. There is but one thing that can cleanse you so that you will be found acceptable in the eyes of the Almighty, and that is the precious blood of Jesus Christ.

Revelation 7:9-14 …”These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb”.

My friend if you want to stand on that sea of glass some day, then you have to be washed in the blood of the Lamb. What does it mean to be ‘washed’ in His blood?

Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

Now I want you to think for a moment. When you were a child, did your mom ever dress you up real nice and tell you not to get dirty; but you went outside and played any ways; and you got those nice clean clothes dirty? And your mom could look at the stains that your disobedience caused, and she could tell exactly what you had been doing. The green stains were from the grass, the mud was from the riverbank, and the black stains were from the coal bin. What ever you came in contact with left a mark upon you didn’t it?

Now think about sin. Sin is the transgression of God’s law. It is an act of disobedience. When a person disobeys, that sin leaves a stain. Not only upon the conscience of the person, but also upon the record books of heaven.

The Bible tells us that there is a book of Remembrance (Malachi 3:16), there is a faithful record of every sin that a person ever committed, and one day the sinner will face their book. The Bible says the books will be opened and the dead will be judged out of those things that were written in the books. The Bible says that GOD shall bring every work along with every secrete thing into Judgment (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14); Jesus said that man shall give an account for every idle word that they spoke. My friend every sin has left a faithful stain upon the record books of heaven. And there is but one thing that can remove the stain.

Hebrews 9:22-23 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

The Bible says that the patterns or the shadows of the Mosaic Law were purified with the blood of these animals, but the heavenly things must be purified with a better sacrifice. For the record books of heaven could never be cleansed with the blood of bulls and goats. What does it take to cleanse the heavenly things? Look at vs. 24

Hebrews 9:24-26 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

It is by the precious sacrifice of Jesus Christ that we can have the stains of our sins removed from the heavenly places.

HOW DID HEAVEN BECOME DEFILED?

There are some who teach that when Jesus ascended to heaven He bore the sins of the people with Him and thus defiled God’s Heavenly temple; But my friends that is not the bible. When Jesus died on that cross every sin, ever committed was placed upon Him, and He bore the credit of our sin to the death. He suffered our judgment, in our place. And when He died that “Second Death” He was released from our penalty.

Romans 6:7 For he that is dead is freed from sin

Paul says in the 6th of Romans: "Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead, dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him: For in that he died, he died unto sin once; but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God." Christ is no longer the sin-bearer. All the sins He ever will bear, He bore on Calvary's cross.

Jesus did not defile Heaven; the record of our sin was already there. When Jesus ascended He began to cleanse the heavenly sanctuary at that moment, blotting out the sins of all those who have believed in Him, for He had paid their debt at the cross. The heavenly Day of Atonement com-menced two thousand years ago.

Why do some people believe that heaven was defiled by the confessed sins of God’s people? Because some people tell us that the earthly Day of Atonement, the Yom Kipper of the Jews was the day that the sanc-tuary was cleansed from the defilement of all the confessed sins of the previous year.

Why do these people not realize that if the blood sprinkled by the priest upon the altar defiled it, then, inasmuch as the earthly sanctuary and its services were a type of the heavenly sanctuary and its services, it follows that the heavenly sanctuary was free from defilement until Christ ascended and sprinkled His blood and thereby defiled it? Who is willing to take the responsibility of declaring that the blood of Christ, which the Holy Scriptures call "precious blood," was so defiled with sin after Christ had paid the penalty on Calvary that when He sprinkled that blood, it defiled the sanctuary? The blood of Christ is represented in the scriptures as cleansing; never defiling! Christ bore the sins to death, He bore them till the price was paid, which was with His life.

My friend was it the confessed sins of God’s people that defiled the Sanctuary?

Leviticus 20:1-3 "And the Lord spake unto Moses saying, Again thou shalt say unto the children of Israel; whosoever he be of the children of Israel or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel, that giveth any of his seed to Molech; he shall surely be put to death: the people of the land shall stone him with stones. And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people: because he hath given of his seed unto Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name."

Here the Bible says that who ever lives in the midst of Israel that gives his child to the false god Molech was to be killed because he defiled the Sanctuary and God’s holy name. It was the willful sin, not the confessed sin that defiled the sanctuary, also look at the book of Numbers.

Numbers 19:20 "But the man that shall be unclean, and shall not purify himself, that soul shall be cut off from among the congregation, because he hath defiled the sanctuary of the Lord.”

My friend confession is a part of cleansing, it is part of purification; it is the unconfessed sins that defiled the Lord’s temple.

Why is this? Why did GOD say His earthly sanctuary was defiled by the sinful deeds of these unbeliev-ers? Simply, GOD chose the nation of Israel as His peculiar people; He chose them as the nation that would represent Him to the world. He was

the head of this nation. And when they sinned they cast reproach upon Him and upon His truths; thus defiling His sanctuary.

And this sin could only be cleansed by the death of the transgressor, whose death was represented by the blood. Thus the blood of the sinner, or the sinner’s substitute instead of defiling the sanctuary, cleanses the sanctuary. The same is true of the heavenly sanctuary. Turn with me to Leviticus.

Leviticus 21:9"The daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father."

When God created this world, it became a part of His household. Adam is "the Son of God." Luke 3:38. "We are also his offspring." Acts 17:28. God said, "Heaven is my throne and the earth is my footstool." GOD and His throne are joined to this planet, as a Father is to the head of His household. When Adam sinned, his sin defiled the sanctuary of God; one of God’s created children was a sinner, it cast reproach upon GOD, and it marred the record book of heaven and all the universe looked to God to purge his sanctuary of that sin. And what is true of the sin of Adam is true of the sin of all of Adam's children. Consequently, the heavenly sanctuary was defiled as was the earthly, by the sinning of the sinner, and not by the sinner's confession of that sin.

WHEN ARE OUR SINS BLOTTED OUT?

Ezekiel 33:15-16 If the wicked restore the pledge, give again that he had robbed, walk in the statutes of life, without committing iniquity; he shall surely live, he shall not die. None of his sins that he hath committed shall be mentioned unto him: he hath done that which is lawful and right; he shall surely live.

When we repent will GOD mention any of our past sins against us? God says He will not! Do you know why?

Jeremiah 31:33-34 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

My friends when GOD forgives He also forgets, and He says He will forgive and not remember the sin any more. In one place it states; “thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea”. Micah 7:19

The Bible teaches that Jesus began the “Day of Atonement” at His ascension, and the very moment we believe upon Him, we receive that personal atonement.

Romans 5:11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.

Jesus did not wait 1800 years to begin to blot out the transgression of His people. But rather the bible says that when we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us

our sins, and to cleanse us from all unright-eousness (1st John 1:9), and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin (1st John 1:7).

*THE INVESTIGATIVE JUDGMENT?

ARE YOUR SINS BLOTTED OUT WHEN YOU REPENT?

The Bible evidence is undisputable; when a person repents and turns to GOD through Jesus Christ, that person’s record of sins is blotted out. Yet the advocates of 1844 tell us that only ‘forgiven’ is written next to the record of our ‘forgiven sins’, and that the sins will not be blotted from the record books until all the angels have investi-gated our records. This investigation they say, began in 1844 with the records of the dead saints, and will soon begin upon the living. My friend, if you know anything about the Bible, you will know that it does not speak of such a thing!

Yes there is a ‘pre-advent’ judgment, because when Jesus returns all the cases of the world are already decided; but this judgment isn’t hard to understand. When a person dies, their case is closed. If you die in Christ Jesus you will not come into condemnation, into a judgment that decides if you are ‘good enough’ to enter heaven; He took that judgment upon Himself at Calvary, and you are left with His spotless record. If you die lost, you will face your record book of sin at the Great White Throne Judgment and NO ONE has lived good enough to be declared innocent there. The Bible says “God knows those that are his”, He doesn’t have to review the books to make sure and not one verse of the Bible teaches that the angels are reviewing the books. There is NO investigation of the true Christian’s ‘record book’, because his sins are blotted out, he has a blank page. As can be seen by following verse”

Acts 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;

We are clearly told here that when we repent our sins are blotted out. The proponent of the 1844 doctrine will say, “Hold on, this verse teaches they will not be blotted out until the ‘times of refreshing’, which is after 1844”. My Dear Reader does this verse say that? Does the word “When” mean ‘until 1844’? Absolutely not, the word when shouldn’t even be used in this verse in the first place. The word for ‘when’ in the actual Greek Text is “hopos”, and this is the only place where it is translated ‘when’ in the KJV. The actual meaning is “That” or “So that” and it is translated this way 46 times in the bible. Here are a few other Bible Versions that has the correct translation.

Acts 3:19 Repent, therefore, and reform your lives, so that the record of your sins may be cancelled, and that there may come seasons of revival from the Lord (WEY)

Acts 3:19 reform ye, therefore, and turn back, for your sins being blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord (YLT)

Acts 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, that so there may come seasons of refreshing from the presence of the Lord; (ASV)

Acts 3:19 So then, let your hearts be changed and be turned to God, so that your sins may be completely taken away, and times of blessing may come from the Lord; (BBE)

Acts 3:19 Repent therefore and be converted, for the blotting out of your sins, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, (DBY)

This verse is also plainly in reference to Peter’s statement in Acts chapter two.

Acts 2:38 And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized (A symbol of conversion)… for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (A Refreshment from the presence of the Lord).

My friends, don’t let anyone deceive you, when you repent you are forgiven and your sins are blotted out. Here is a question that shows the danger of this 1844 doctrine; if you do not believe your sins are blotted out, are they really blotted out?

Jesus said this: Matthew 9:29 “According to your faith be it unto you.”

IF THERE IS NO INVESTIGATIVE JUDGMENT, THEN WHAT DO THESE VERSES ALLUDE TO? Leviticus 23:26-32 And the Lord said to Moses, The tenth day of this seventh month is the day for the taking away of sin; let it be a holy day of worship; you are to keep from pleasure, and give to the Lord an offering made by fire. And on that day you may do no sort of work, for it is a day of taking away sin, to make you clean before the Lord your God. For any person, whoever he may be, who takes his pleasure on that day will be cut off from his people. And if any person, whoever he may be, on that day does any sort of work, I will send destruction on him from among his people. You may not do any sort of work: this is an order for ever through all your generations wherever you may be living. Let this be a Sabbath of special rest to you, and keep your-selves from all pleasure; on the ninth day of the month at nightfall from evening to evening, let this Sabbath be kept.

Here God is teaching by type what is true about Calvary. The ‘Lord’s Goat’ was offered for all the sins of the people of Israel, confessed and unconfessed (Leviticus 16:16) to make atonement for the nation of Israel; yet those who did not acknowledge this event by fasting were cut off. This is a perfect shadow of the plan of salvation.

Christ was offered for the sins of the whole world; past and future, for those that had been confessed, those who will be confessed and for those whom God knew would never be confessed. Yet the merit of this all compassing sacrifice is not credited to those who do not acknowledge it through repentance. Those who do not repent shall be cut off. This is all this ‘type’ is teaching.

THE JUDGMENT OF REVELATION 4-6 AND DANIEL 7

Revelation 6:9-11 And when he opened the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls of them that had been slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: and they cried with a great voice, saying, How long, O Master, the holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And there was given them to each one a white robe; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet

for a little time, until their fellow-servants also and their brethren, who should be killed even as they were, should have fulfilled their course.

The proponents of 1844 tell us “See here the souls of the saints do not receive their Robes until after the judgment begins in Revelation 4, which corresponds with Daniel 7:9-13! Thus these martyrs had to be ‘investigated’ before they could be declared righteous”.

Dear reader, clearly Revelation four and the verses alluded to in Daniel 7 do depict the same judgment scene, but it is not the judgment of the saints, by no means. It is the judgment of the wicked, gentile world; who will be judged, and found guilty and finally defeated at the return of Jesus Christ. This judgment began at the ascension of Christ. If you read the judgments of the 7 seals, or the 7 trumpets, or the 7 plagues, these are all dealing with the wicked world; and the same is so in Daniel 7, where judgment is against the ‘wicked horn’ the last gentile ruler of this earth.

Daniel 7:26-27 But the judgment shall be set, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end. And the kingdom and the dominion, and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High: his kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.

It is this ‘little horn’ that persecutes and destroys God’s saints, it is he that sheds the blood of the Lord’s martyrs.

Daniel 7:21 I continued looking, when, this horn, made war with the holy ones,—and prevailed against them:

At the very moment the blood is shed, it begins to cry out for justice to GOD, like the righteous blood of Abel. And to the precious martyr, who dies in the grace of our Lord, to him is assured a white robe. Revelation 6 is not teaching that after these ‘martyrs’ are killed, 1800 years later they will be investigated, and if found worthy given a white robe, what a shame to change these verses to mean something they don’t. They are given the robe of Christ’s righteousness at conversion, and assured they will have it at the resurrection. Their fate is sealed when they breathe their last breath, their case settled for eternity.

Please notice the 24 elders are wearing their white robes and their crowns before the books are open in the judgment (Revelation 6:1). How did they escape this ‘investigative judgment’?

Revelation 4:4 And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold.

The ‘souls’ of the martyrs were crying out for justice, and God delivers them justice, He brings into judgment those who murdered them.

Daniel 7:22 until that the Ancient of Days, came, and, justice, was granted to the holy ones of the Highest,—and, the time, arrived, that the holy ones should possess, the kingdom. (ROTHERHAM)

Dear reader, the only way one can find an investigative judgment in these verses is if their mind is predisposed that there is such a thing. I ask the readers if Moses, Elijah and Enoch had to face this investigative judgment? Clearly they were found worthy, and were taken to be with the Lord; and they have walked upon the streets of gold for centuries and have fellowshipped in the glory of GOD; will their books be opened, and every sin discussed among the angels and Christ, to see if they truly repented? Do you not see how unbiblical this doctrine truly is?

IS THE SCAPE GOAT SATAN?

Leviticus 16:21-22 And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness: And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness.

The scapegoat is said to ‘bear all the iniquities’; who does the Bible say bears the iniquities of us all?

Isaiah 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Isaiah 53:11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

Clearly the scapegoat represents Jesus Christ as the sin bearer.

Yet the 1844 proponents tell us that Satan is the sin bearer, that ultimately the guilt and sin of all of God’s children will be laid upon him, and he will be bear them to the death. Dear reader does this not make Satan our ultimate Savior? The Bible says Jesus bore our sins, He did so once, forever. He bore our guilt to the grave. Our sins will not be resurrected and placed upon Satan. Satan will only bear his own sins when he is punished on that final day.

Some may ask, how can a goat that is not sacrificed represent Jesus? The scapegoat typifies the removal of our sins forever from the books of judgment. The scapegoat was lead to where it would never be seen, and from whence it would never return again and this was ensured by its death; and this is a proper type of Christ, who has borne all the sins of all His people in his own body on the cross, and all the punishment due unto them; and so has made full satisfaction for them, and has removed them from them, as far as the east is from the west; even out of the sight of avenging justice; so that when they are sought they shall not be found, nor shall they ever return unto them, or be brought against them any more. I ask the 1844 believer to give me ONE VERSE that teaches Satan will bear the confessed sins of God’s people.

ACCORDING TO DANIEL WHEN WAS THE DAY OF ATONEMENT TO OCCUR?

These who promote the 1844 Day of Atonement base their belief on the prophecies of Daniel, yet Daniel tells us clearly when the Atonement would occur. The Bible tells us that the Day of Atonement had to occur within the 70 weeks of Daniel 9, which began in 457 BC and continued to 34 AD, we will not go into how we arrive at these dates for the weeks because the reader most assuredly understands this prophecy.

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation (kaphar) for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

The Hebrew term in the original text for ‘reconciliation’ is “Kaphar” which means “atonement”. And it is translated such 71 times in the Old Testament, the Daniel tells us that the Atonement would be made in this particular time span. Here are two Bible versions that translate this particular version.

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks have been determined upon thy people, and upon the holy city, for sin to be ended, and to seal up transgressions, and to blot out the iniquities, and to make atonement for iniquities, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal the vision and the prophet, and to anoint the Most Holy. (LXX)

Daniel 9:24 "Seventy weeks of years are decreed concerning your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy. (RSV)

No one should deny that the Lord’s Sacrifice, which was represented as the Lord’s Goat was slain on the Day of Atonement; this sacrifice represented Jesus Christ at Calvary. Thus those who teach that the Day of Atonement did not occur till 1844 are left with another conspicuous violation of the type. All must admit that the Lord's goat as the antitype of Christ, was slain on the day of atonement. Then Christ had to die on the Day of Atonement; and the Day of Atonement had to begin when atonement for iniquity was made. The Lord declared to the prophet Daniel that the atonement for iniquity was to be made within the seventy weeks. This proves positively that the Day of Atonement began before the seventy weeks ended. When I say "day of atonement," I do not refer to a day of twenty-four hours, but to a period time. The first great act on the morning of the Day of Atonement was the slaying of the Lord's goat, which typified the death of Christ; therefore, when the cross of Calvary bore the Lamb of God the great anti-typical Day of Atonement begun. The type DOES NOT TEACH that after the Lord’s Goat was slain the High Priest remained in the first compartment of the sanctuary for months, but rather he passed directly through the first, and through the veil into the presence of GOD. So we see that the doctrine of an 1844 ‘Day of Atonement’ does great damage to the type.

BREAKING THE CHAIN OF ADVENTISM DANIEL 8 AND 9

The proponent of the 1844 doctrine teaches that Daniel did not understand all of the vision of Daniel 8, thus the Angel is sent 12 years later to try to again explain it. They tell us the second explanation is found in Daniel 9. This LINK is very important for the 1844 Advocate, without it he has no starting point for his 2300 year prophecy. What I would like to present today is clear biblical evidence that this link, is truly no link at all.

After Daniel had seen the vision of the ram, goat and little horn (Daniel 8:1-12), he heard how long the desolation would last, which was 2300 Evening Mornings (Daniel 8:13-14). But he didn’t know what the vision meant, who was this ram? Who was this goat? What do these horns symbolize? So God commanded Gabriel to explain the vision to Daniel.

Daniel 8:16 And I heard a man’s voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.

As any reader of this prophecy will note, Gabriel did a wonderful job teaching Daniel the prophecy. He names the Ram and Goat by name (Daniel 8:20-21). He tells Daniel that Greece would be divided between four kings, and at the latter end of their empire, a descendent (a horn out of a horn) of one of these four kings will fight against God’s people, and would take away 2300 evening and morning sacrifices. What an exact prophecy! Who couldn’t understand this?

The 1844 believer says by the time Gabriel left, Daniel still did not understand the {vision}. This is a sad testimony for Gabriel because Gabriel had been specifically commanded to make Daniel understand the {vision}.

What the 1844 believer says in actuality is that Gabriel disobeyed GOD, and GOD was not big enough to cause his word to be fulfilled. They say before Gabriel could finish telling Daniel about the 2300 evening and mornings, Daniel fainted; and woke up dumbfounded, not understanding the vision. Thus they attempt to establish a link to Daniel 9 by saying Gabriel had to return 12 years later to finishing explaining the vision.

So the entire link rests upon Daniel not understanding the vision.

Let’s look at the first presumption of the 1844 advocate. Did Daniel faint before Gabriel had finished his explanation?

Daniel 8:26-27 And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days. And I Daniel fainted, and was sick certain days; afterward I rose up, and did the king’s business; and I was astonished at the vision, but none understood it.

Clearly Gabriel finished his explanation in vs 26, telling Daniel to shut up, or to seal up the vision, because it is yet future. Then sometime after this, Daniel faints. The explanation was complete, and then Daniel fainted. Why didn’t Daniel faint before the completion of the vision? The prophet was sustained by the power of GOD; God wanted him to understand, and Daniel was going to understand; and my friend Daniel did understand.

The second presumption of the 1844 crowd is the way they explain verse 27.

Daniel 8:27 And I Daniel fainted, and was sick certain days; afterward I rose up, and did the king’s business; and I was astonished at the vision, but none understood it.

They say; “see! Daniel didn’t understand the vision, because NONE understood it”. Again they are saying Gabriel sinned, and GOD did not have enough power to cause his word to come to pass. If they would simply search the word of GOD they would see that this verse actually proves that Daniel understood it.

We can be assured of this by looking at the term “understood”, it is the Hebrew word Biyn in the hiphil tense, and in this tense it means to “Cause to understand or to teach”. It is used in the following verses.

1 Chronicles 25:8 And they cast lots, ward against ward, as well the small as the great, the teacher <biyn> as the scholar.

2nd Chronicles 35:3 And said unto the Levites that taught (biyn) all Israel, which were holy unto the LORD, Put the holy ark in the house which Solomon the son of David king of Israel did build; it shall not be a burden upon your shoulders: serve now the LORD your God, and his people Israel,

Nehemiah 8:9 ¶ And Nehemiah, which is the Tirshatha, and Ezra the priest the scribe, and the Levites that taught (Biyn) the people, said unto all the people, This day is holy unto the LORD your God; mourn not, nor weep. For all the people wept, when they heard the words of the law.

Job 6:24 Teach me, and I will hold my tongue: and ‘cause me to understand’ {biyn) wherein I have erred.

The literal reading of the last part of Daniel 8:27 is this: “I was Appalled at the revelation but taught it not”.

Instead of ‘astonished’ being dumbfounded as the 1844 advocate says, it actually means ‘appalled’, it is translated from the Hebrew word shamem in the Hithpolel stem.

The scriptures are simply saying that Daniel did not teach it. Not because he didn’t understand (a child could understand this prophecy), but because he was forbidden to do so by the Angel.

Daniel 8:26 "And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true. Therefore shut thou up the vision, for it shall be for many days."

Thus the chain is broken, the first link is destroyed. But we will not stop here, but we will also show you that the other ‘two links’ are not really links at all.

MAREH AND CHAZOWN

The next argument the supporters of 1844 present in arguing that Daniel 9 is connected to Daniel 8 is the following. They say there are two different words for vision used in Daniel 9. One word refers exclusively to the 2300-Day vision, the other to the 70 weeks vision. Is this so? Is one of these words only applied to the 2300-Day vision? Let us see. The two words are mar’eh (04758) and chazown (02377).

Daniel 9:21 uses the term chazown for vision. Daniel 9:23 uses mar’eh. Daniel 9:24 uses chazown. What is the difference? Mar’eh means a general revelation, through natural sight, spiritual vision or through sound. Chazown usually refers only to spiritual vision. Daniel used these words interchangeably; in fact both words are used to describe the vision of the 2300 days of Daniel 8.

Daniel 8:26 And the vision <04758 mar’eh> of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision <02377 chazown>; for it shall be for many days.

Thus neither word exclusively refers to either vision; in fact mar’eh who the 1844 believer says refers exclus-ively to the 2300 evening and mornings refers also to the vision given to Daniel in Chapter 10.

Daniel 10:1 ¶ In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing was true, but the time appointed was long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision (Mar-eh).

There are over three different “Mar-eh” in the book of Daniel; Those who try to use this word as a link between Daniel 8 and 9 are building a straw man doctrine that has no Biblical foundation. Thus the second link has snapped also.

DOES DANIEL 9 GIVE A STARTING POINT FOR THE 2300-DAY PROPHECY?

Those who hold to the 1844 doctrine teach that Daniel 9 provides the starting date for the 2300-day prophecy of the previous chapter. They tell us that the Angel Gabriel returned to Daniel over a decade after the ‘evening morning’ vision to make it clear to him, and thus providing the place in history to begin the 2300-day count, this is their third and final link.

Was Daniel in need of a ‘starting date’ dear reader? The vision concerning the 2300 days provides its own starting date, it begins when the sacrifices are caused to cease by the work of the Greek little horn, and we will explain this in more detail in the next chapter. But for now let’s look and see if Daniel 9’s vision of weeks, is associated with Daniel 8’s ‘morning evening’ vision.

After praying for his people concerning their captivity Daniel is visited by an Angel.

Daniel 9:21-23 Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation. And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding. At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision.

Clearly the angel was sent as a response to Daniel’s prayer, we have the prayer before us in the previous verses of this chapter; do you see Daniel praying about the 2300-day vision? No, he is concerned with his people, and the state of the holy city Jerusalem. Yet the 1844 believer tells us that Gabriel has come to clear up in the mind of Daniel the 2300 day vision, for he wants “the vision to be clear”.

Then the question must be, what vision does he want to make clear for Daniel? Is it the vision he had had over 10 years prior which is not mentioned in his prayer, or is it the following vision that answers his prayers and explains that the city would be restored? The very next verse answers the question.

Daniel 9:24 "Seventy weeks are determined concerning thy people and concerning thy holy city to finish the transgression and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy. (KJ21)

Here is the answer to his prayers, here is the vision that explains that the city would indeed be built, and the Jews would have 490 years to put an end to their sins. Yet the 1844 advocate will say this verse tells us the 490 years are “cut off” from the 2300-day prophecy. How do they come to such a conclusion? They say the word “determined” means to cut off, thus 490 years are cut off of the 2300-day prophecy.

But dear reader this is not the meaning of “determined” at all, they jump to this conclusion because the ‘strong’s concordance’ lists ‘cut off’ as one definition for the Hebrew term ‘chathak’. Yet in truth this word in this verb tense has a very plain meaning. ‘chathak’ in the Niphal tense means: to be determined, be decreed, be settled, be marked out. Notice the following translations of this verse.

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks have been fixed for your people and your holy town (BBE)Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city (JPS)Daniel 9:24 "Seventy weeks of years are decreed concerning your people and your holy city (RSV)

Clearly this verse is not trying to tell us that these weeks were ‘CUT OFF’ from another number, but rather that GOD had determined the Jews would have 490 years to rebuild their city and to anoint the Messiah. Isn’t this the clear reading of the text? Thus the third link is broken, the chain of Adventism is proven to be a figment of Ellen White’s imagination.

*THEN WHAT HAPPENED AT THE END OF THE 2300 DAYS?

Dear reader, are you now asking yourself, “What really happened at the end of the 2300 days”? The question is readily available to any seeking reader; let’s quickly review the eighth chapter of Daniel. In the vision of Daniel 8 we are told that the Ram represented the Kingdom of Persia, the Goat the Kingdom of Greece; each horn represents a king (Daniel 8:20-21). Always remember that Beasts represent Kingdoms (Daniel 7:23) and horns represent kings (Revelation 17:12) in prophecy. Now we will continue: At the death of the first King of Greece, which was Alexander the Great; the Kingdom of Greece was divided into four parts. Alexander’s four top generals divided the kingdom. One of these four generals, Ptolemy, began a dynasty in Egypt(South); and Seleucus did the same in Syria(North). Lycemicus took over Asia Minor (east) and Cassander took Macedonia (West).

Now another character comes to view in the vision, a little horn rises out of one of the four horns or kings;

Daniel 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.

Please notice that this horn represents a king, who is a descendant of (came out of) one of the first four kings, there is no new kingdom introduced here. Beasts represent kingdoms and horns kings. The teacher of the 1844 doctrine says ‘the horn came from the four winds’, but the text does not support this! (*See Appendix B) Neither does the explan-ation given to Daniel by the angel. This horn came up out of the divided kingdom during the later years of the Greek Kingdom, not after the Kingdom of Greece..

Daniel 8:23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

We are then told that this ‘horn’ would fight against God’s people, cause the sacrifices to cease, and make a wreck of the holy place or temple.

Daniel 8:11-12 It made itself great, even as great as the lord of the army; and by it the regular burned offering was taken away, and the place overturned and the holy place made waste. against the regular burned offering; and…crushed down to the earth, and it did its pleasure and things went well for it. (BBE)

Then we have a very important question.

Daniel 8:13 And I heard one saint speaking, and a saint said to a certain one speaking, How long shall the vision continue, even the removal of the sacrifice, and the bringing in of the sin of desolation; and how long shall the sanctuary and host be trampled? LXX

What is the question dear reader? The Saint wanted to know, how long would this ‘horn’ be permitted to remove the sacrifices and trample underfoot the sanctuary. And this is the question that provoked the following answer.

Daniel 8:14 And he said unto me, Until two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings: then shall the sanctuary be vindicated. (BBE)

Thus the answer is; there would be a cessation of 2300 ‘evening and morning’, which the original Hebrew states, and then the Sanctuary would be vindicated from the ‘trampling’ of this horn. The fact that the term ‘days’ in this verse really is ‘evening morning’ is seen in verse 27. The evening and morning here mentioned were the two ‘continual’ daily sacrifices that were performed at the temple; which this little horn would cause to cease.

1 Chronicles 16:40 To offer burnt offerings unto the LORD upon the altar of the burnt offering continually morning and evening, and to do according to all that is written in the law of the LORD, which he commanded Israel; (Also see Exodus 29:39, Numbers 28:4 )

The term that is translated ‘vindicated’ in the BBE and Cleansed in the AKJV of the Bible is “tsadaq” and it is in the Niphal tense, and it means to be made right.

Thus the abominable work of the ‘horn’ would corrupt 2300 daily sacrifices or the space of 1150 days then the temple would be restored. This is the plain interpretation of this vision.

What problems are then found with the 1844 interpretation?

Those who believe 1844 was the year the ‘2300 days’ ended tell us the little horn is Rome. But the little horn is not Rome, for this little horn came out of one of the four provinces of Greece. Rome rose separately from the Grecian Empire; also note in this vision no other beast (Kingdom) was introduced, the whole vision begins with the reign of the Ram and ends during the reign of the Goat; for the little horn operates in the latter days of the Grecian Empire (Daniel 8:23).

Secondly, Those who teach that the ‘Day of Atonement’ occurred in 1844 make several mistakes with Daniel 8:13-14. First the Sanctuary is defiled in this chapter by the acts of the little horn for 2300 evening and morning sacrifices and not by the confessed sins of God’s people. The term “Sanctuary… cleansed” actually means the Sanctuary would be made right or vindicated. It has absolutely nothing to do with the Day of Atonement, where the Sanctuary was symbolically ‘purged’ from sin. The Hebrew word that is used in reference of ‘cleansing from sin’ is khaw-taw and it is not used once in chapter 8 of Daniel.

Also the term translated ‘days’ in the King James Version is seen to actually read “Evening and Morning”. There is no Biblical reason to apply the ‘day for a year’ principal to this phrase. There is nowhere in the holy writ where the principle is applied to such a phrase. The “evening and morning” is used in reference to the total number of the daily sacrifices that would be marred by the work of the little horn (See 1 st Chronicles 16:40). Thus the sanctuary would be defiled for 1150 days.

Fourthly, those who promote 1844 tell us that the 2300 days began in 457 BC; yet they tell us the little horn is Rome or more specifically the papacy. I ask how could Rome who did not come in contact with God’s people until 63 BC cause the sacrifices to cease and trample down the Holy Temple 400 years before? How could the Papacy, who received their power no earlier than 321 AD be credited with causing the sacrifices to cease 800 years before? And did the Papacy change in 1844? No, they continue to do what they have always done.

WHAT IS THE BIBLICAL EXPLANATION FOR THIS VISION?

We are told that the ‘little horn’ would arise from one of the divisions of the Greek Empire. His conquest would be to the south, to the east and to the pleasant land. Thus the little horn or king had to come from the northern division, which is Syria.

Some suggest that we must look for a King that was greater than Alexander to find the true little horn, for the Bible says he ‘waxed exceeding great’, where as Alexander was simply called ‘great’. But this is not the necessary reading of the scriptures, please note the Young’s Literal Translation.

Daniel 8:9-10 And from the one of them come forth… a little horn, and it exerteth itself greatly toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the beauteous land;

And also we offer the Douay Rheims translation: Daniel 8:9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn: and it became great against the south, and against the east, and against the strength.

Thus we see that this horn was little, but it used all of its power to fight against these three. So we now look for a ‘king’ of Syria, who in the later days of the Greek Empire

fought against Egypt to the south, against Persia to the East, and against Israel; who also interrupted the sanctuary services causing the sacrifices to cease. Does history tell us of such a person?

History tells us of such a person by the name of Antiochus Epiphanes, who sprung from the kingdom of the Seleucidae in Syria, or from Seleucus king of Syria, one of the four horns before mentioned. The Apocryphal book of the bible called the Maccabees gives us great detail of this evil man.

“And there came out of them a wicked root Antiochus surnamed Epiphanes, son of Antiochus the king, and he reigned in the hundred and thirty and seventh year of the kingdom of the Greeks.”(1 Maccabees 1:10)

Did he wax great toward the south (Egypt)? “Wherefore he entered into Egypt with a great multitude, with chariots, and elephants, and horsemen, and a great navy, And made war against Ptolemee king of Egypt,”(1 Maccabees 1:17-18)

Did he toward Persia? “Wherefore, being greatly perplexed in his mind, he determined to go into Persia, there to take the tributes of the countries, and to gather much money.” (1 Maccabees 3:31)

Did he enter Israel? 1 Maccabees 1:20 “Antiochus… in the one hundred and forty-third year. He went up against Israel and came to Jerusalem with a strong force.

Yes indeed, history tells us that Antiochus raged against the elect of God, and tread upon his precious stars (his religious leaders See I Maccabees 1:25, I Maccabees 2:35, etc). He even made himself ‘GOD’ by declaring himself “God Manifest”.

Did Antiochus defile the sanctuary? 1st Maccabees 1:21, 37, 39 “He arrogantly entered the sanctuary and took the golden altar, the lampstand for the light, and all its utensils... On every side of the sanctuary they shed innocent blood; they even defiled the sanctuary… Her sanctuary became desolate as a desert”

1st Maccabees 1:46-47 “to defile the sanctuary and the priests {he had them} to build altars and sacred precincts and shrines for idols, to sacrifice swine and unclean animals”

The little horn “Antiochus” did all that he could to abolish the true religion and godliness; he cut in pieces the copies of the book of the law, and burnt them and he put to death any one who had a copy of the bible or professed the truth. (1st Maccabees 1:56-57).

How long did this defiling of God’s Sanctuary last? Daniel 8:14 And he said unto me, Until two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings: then shall the sanctuary be vindicated. (BBE)

The Sanctuary is defiled for 2300 evening and morning sacrifices, which is equal 1150 days and then the Sanctuary would be vindicated from the ‘trampling’ of this horn, says the prophecy.

Did Antiochus fulfill this prophecy? Yes indeed. On approximately the 15 th Day of Tishri (7th Jewish month), of the year of one hundred and forty-five of the Greek Kingdom (167 BC); Antiochus sent out letters forbidding the sacrifices in the Sanctuary of GOD.

1 Maccabees 1:44-45 And the king sent letters by messengers to Jerusalem and the cities of Judah; he directed them to follow customs strange to the land, to forbid burnt offerings and sacrifices and drink offerings in the sanctuary, to profane sabbaths and feasts,

About two months later he placed an altar to Zeus upon the Lord’s Altar, making it desolate.

1 Maccabees 1:54 Now on the fifteenth day of Chislev, in the one hundred and forty-fifth year, they erected a desolating sacrilege upon the altar of burnt offering. They also built altars in the surrounding cities of Judah,

If we count 1150 days from the approximate time of the letter forbidding the sacrificial offerings, it would reach to the 25th day of Chislev (the 9th Jewish month) in the year 148 of the Greeks (164 BC). Upon this day the Jews offered sacrifice once more in the CLEANSED house of GOD.

““Then Judas appointed certain men to fight against those that were in the fortress, until he had cleansed the sanctuary. So he chose priests of blameless conversation, such as had pleasure in the law: Who cleansed the sanctuary, and bare out the defiled stones into an unclean place… Now on the five and twentieth day of the ninth month, which is called the month Casleu (Chislev), in the hundred forty and eighth year, they rose up betimes in the morning, And offered sacrifice according to the law upon the new altar of burnt offerings, which they had made. ”(1 Maccabees 4:41-53)

The Jews commemorate the triumph of Judas with an annual feast called the Feast of Dedication (or Hanukkah). The Savior honored this feast by His presence (John 10:22).

The Sanctuary was "cleansed" by Judas Maccabeus when he purified the holy places, sanctified the courts, rebuilt the altar, renewed the vessels of the sanctuary, put all in their proper places and offered a new the daily sacrifice: Thus we can see a stunning fulfillment of prophecy as Judas Maccabeus cleansed and vindicated the sanctuary of God at the end of a 1150-day period.

Dear reader this is the Biblical and historical interpretation of this chapter; as you can see, those who place the ending of the 2300 ‘days’ in 1844 do so with out Biblical or historical support, and their interpretation mars the Atoning Work of Jesus Christ in minds of its believers, yet this doctrine is the central pillar and foundation of the Adventist Faith.

“The scripture which above all others had been both the foundation and the central pillar of the advent faith was the declaration: "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." Daniel 8:14.” GC 409.1

Thus we see that the 1844 proponents rest their faith and understanding on a fragile and unstable foundation, when compared to the true foundation of Christianity. “Jesus Christ being the Chief Cornerstone”.

Appendix A

ELLEN WHITE AND SHUT THE DOOR What is the “Shut Door”?

By Martin Eldonmartinthezman@hotmail.com

The Advent Movement of the early 1800’s expected Jesus to return in the year of 1844. As we all know, Jesus did not appear at that time. Yet instead of giving up what they experienced as a false revival; some within this movement decided that they had the correct date, but had expected the wrong event to occur. The Millerites decided that on that date Jesus entered the second compartment of the heavenly sanctuary and began an "INVESTIGATIVE JUDGMENT" of His people. This period would be of very short duration, hence their expectation of His soon coming. In hand with this doctrine they taught the opportunity for salvation for the world was over; there was no way anyone could be saved other than the small group of Adventists who had accepted the Millerite message and the "midnight cry." This particular doctrine was known as the SHUT DOOR. One of the first to propose this idea was O.R.L. Crosier, who states:

"I kept the seventh day nearly a year, about 1848. In 1846 I explained the idea of the sanctuary in an article in an extra number of the Day Star, Cincinnati, O. The object of that article was to support the theory that the door of mercy was shut, a theory which I, and nearly all Adventists who had adopted William Miller's views, held from 1844 to 1848. Yes, I know that Ellen G. Harmon - now Mrs. White - held that shut-door theory at that time. Truly yours, "O.R.L. Crosier."

Concerning Crosier’s article Ellen White stated: “I feel fully authorized by the Lord to recommend that extra to every saint" ("A Word to the Little Flock," pp. 11, 12) Did the Lord authorize His prophet to endorse a book that FALSELY taught the time of salvation had passed for the sinner?

Another one of the early teachers of the ‘shut door’ doctrine was Joseph Turner.

"But can any sinners be converted if the door is shut? Of course they cannot, though changes that may appear to be conversions may take place...." The Advent Mirror, that of January, 1845.

These and men like them lead Joseph Bates into accepting the ‘shut door’ doctrine.

In the Review and Herald, Aug. 19, 1851, Joseph Bates says: "We understand that he [Christ] was a Mediator for all the world, ministering in the Holy Place (Heb. 9:26), in the Tabernacle called the Sanctuary, from the day of Pentecost (A.D. 31) until his appointed time, the end of the twenty-three hundred days, or years - the fall of 1844. At this point of time, then, the door was shut against the Sardis church [the Protestant church] and the wicked world."

James Bates added another twist to the doctrine, he explained the door was shut in 1844, and in the end of 7 years or in 1851 Christ would return.

James Bates was the one who lead James White and Ellen Harmon into the ‘light’ of the shut door. James White explains the “Shut Door” in the same manner. The Present Truth, May 1850, he dealt in great detail with the subject, especially on the shut door. In that article he says, page 79:

"From the best light we could then obtain from the autumnal types we were very confident that the days would end at the seventh month.... When we came up to that point of time, all our sympathy, burden and prayers for sinners ceased, and the unanimous feeling and testimony was, that our work for the world was finished for ever… But the sinner, to whom Jesus had stretched out his arms all the day long, and who had rejected the offers of salvation, was left without an advocate, when Jesus passed from the Holy Place, and shut that door in 1844. " NOTE: This article establishes that he still believed in the ‘Shut door’. His article was to establish that what they had been preaching for the previous five years was correct. Keep in mind the dates on these articles. They range from the Fall of 1844 up to 1850-51

In Selected Messages, Volume 1, page 63, Ellen explains what the term "shut door" originally meant, and admits that she did believe the doctrine like the rest of her associates. But, she insists that this was BEFORE her first vision, and that her visions corrected the error:

"For a time after the disappointment in 1844, I did hold, in common with the advent body, that the door of mercy was then forever closed to the world. This position was taken before my first vision was given me. It was the light given me of God that corrected our error, and enabled us to see the true position." NOTE: Ellen also explains the ‘Shut door’ doctrine in ‘Spirit of Prophecy Vol 4. p.268’.

There should be NO MISUNDERSTANDING on what the term “Shut Door” meant for Adventists in the years from 1844-1851, nor should we question the fact that all three of these believed in the doctrine.

During these 7 years this group taught that the only ones who could be converted were those who were under the age of accountability during the seventh month of 1844. Some Adventists point to the fact that James and Ellen ‘labored’ for lost souls during these years as proof that they did not believe the ‘shut door’, but this is false, they merely labored for the young people who were coming to age during this period. All other conversions were said to be false, that they only had the appearance of conversion but the ‘sinful’ heart remained.

Now in the previous quote of Ellen White she tells us that she came to this position before she had a vision, and it was actually her visions that taught the group that they had erred. She and her defenders deny that she ever had a vision that supported the ‘shut door’ doctrine. With just a little investigation we can see that this is false. First the clear history of this era teaches us that it took Ellen White six years to finally wake up. If it is true that she NEVER had a vision that taught the classic "shut door" doctrine, it is strange that she never had a vision that condemned it as error either! She should have been condemning the error all those years, by inspiration, and straightening out her husband, Bates, and the rest. This was not a ‘minor doctrine’ this was a doctrine that condemned

the world, and taught the poor sinners that Jesus was no longer willing to save them! Yet we shall see that her visions did give support to the doctrine of ‘the shut door’.

ELLEN’S SHUT DOOR VISIONS

Her first vision is claimed for December 1844. It was not printed until it appeared in The Day Star, January 24, 1846. It was also printed in the broadside of April 6, 1846, and again in May, 1847 in James White's booklet, A Word to the Little Flock. In 1851, in Experience and Views, THE MOST POINTED SHUT DOOR STATEMENTS WERE DELETED, and were from that time on in all subsequent printings. In the quotation below, the deleted portion of this section has been emphasized. This is just a small part of the "vision" that deals with the Advent people, and the reestablishing of the positions taken concerning October 22, 1844:

"Others rashly denied the light behind them, and said that it was not God that had led them out so far. The light behind them went out leaving their feet in perfect darkness, and they stumbled and got their eyes off the mark and lost sight of Jesus, and fell off the path down in the dark and wicked world below. IT WAS JUST AS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO GET ON THE PATH AGAIN AND GO TO THE CITY, AS ALL THE WICKED WORLD WHICH GOD HAD REJECTED."

What does the vision teach? That the faint hearted ‘Adventists’ that had left the light had forever lost their salvation just like the rest of the wicked world! My friend this is the exact doctrine of the ‘shut door’. What did James White say was the effect of the vision?

"When she received her first vision, Dec. 1844, she and all the band in Portland, Maine, [where her parents then resided] had given up the midnight-cry, and shut door, as being in the past. It was then that the Lord shew her in vision, the error into which she and the band in Portland had fallen. She then related her vision to the band, and about sixty confessed their error, and acknowledged their 7th month experience to be the work of God" A Word to the Little Flock, 1847, p.22.

Note what he says: After the failure of October 22, the group had given up the midnight-cry, and shut door; it was not in the past, but yet future. What turned them around to renew their faith in all of that, including the shut door, was Ellen White's vision! And, the "shut door" they had given up before the vision, and the one they preached following that vision, was that opportunity for salvation for the world was over! When Brother Bates learned of her visions he wondered if she had read the tracts by Joseph Turner (The avid teacher of the ‘shut door’ doctrine). The following is a letter from her to Bates, notice her joy in finding that her first vision was in perfect agreement with Turner's views.

"After I had the vision and God gave me light, he bade me deliver it to the band, but I shrank from it. I was young, and I thought they would not receive it from me. I disobeyed the Lord, and instead of remaining at home, where the meeting was to be that night, I got in a sleigh in the morning and rode three or four miles and there I found Joseph Turner.

He merely inquired how I was and if I was in the way of my duty. I said nothing, for I knew I was not.

"Very early next morning Joseph Turner called, said he was in haste going out of the city in a short time, and wanted I should tell him all that God had shown me in vision. It was with fear and trembling I told him all. After I had got through he said he had told out the same last evening. I REJOICED, for I had expected he was coming out against me, for all the while I had not heard any one say what he believed. He said the Lord had sent him to talk the evening before, but as I would not, he meant his children should have the light in some way, so he took him.”

Now notice in the same letter that her second vision was also used to confirm others in the shut door doctrine.

"There were but few out when he talked, so the next meeting I told my vision, and the band, believing my visions from God, received what God bade me deliver to them.

"The view about the Bridegroom's coming I had about the middle of February, 1845, while in Exeter, Maine, in meeting with Israel Dammon, James, and many others. Many of them did not believe in a shut door. I suffered much at the commencement of the meeting. Unbelief seemed to be on every hand.

"There was one sister there that was called very spiritual. She had traveled and been a powerful preacher the most of the time for twenty years. She had been truly a mother in Israel. But a division had risen in the band on the shut door. She had great sympathy, and could not believe the door was shut. I had known nothing of their difference. Sister Durben got up to talk. I felt very, very sad.

"At length my soul seemed to be in agony, and while she was talking I fell from my chair to the floor. It was then I had a view of Jesus rising from His mediatorial throne and going to the holiest as Bridegroom to receive His kingdom. They were all deeply interested in the view. They all said it was entirely new to them. The Lord worked in mighty power, setting the truth home to their hearts.

"Most of them received the vision, and were settled upon the shut door. Previous to this I had no light on the coming of the Bridegroom, but had expected him to this earth to deliver His people on the tenth day of the seventh month. I did not hear a lecture or a word in any relating to the Bridegroom's going to the holiest." (Letter B-3-1847, Letter to Joseph Bates, July 13, 1847)

This letter speaks for its self. Yet another point to make is concerning Israel Dammon, in whose home the second "vision" was received, he became an avid shut-door advocate just like Joseph Turner. Though she does not relate her second vision in the letter to Bates, it appeared in the broadside of April 6, 1846. Note the following portion from it: "Then Jesus rose up from the throne, and the most of those who were bowed down arose with Him; AND I DID NOT SEE ONE RAY OF LIGHT PASS FROM JESUS TO THE CARELESS MULTITUDE AFTER HE AROSE, AND THEY WERE IN PERFECT DARKNESS." (emphasis added)

As the year of 1851 drew near this was modified some, they eventually taught children who came to age after 1844 could be converted, which can be seen in this article by David Arnold, which was endorsed by Ellen White.

“But, says the objector, does not this leave the present generation, who have passed the line of accountability, since that time without an intercessor or mediator, and leave them destitute of the means of salvation? In reply to this objection, I would remark, that as they were then in a state of INNOCENCY, they were entitled to a record upon the breast-plate of judgment as much as those who had sinned and received pardon: and are therefore subjects of the present intercession of our great high priest”. --‘Present Truth’ December of 1849

In 1849 Ellen White’s visions were still denying any true conversions.

"I saw that the mysterious signs and wonders and false reformations would increase and spread. The reformations that were shown me were not reformations from error to truth, but from bad to worse; for those who professed a change of heart had only wrapped about them a religious garb, which covered up the iniquity of a wicked heart. Some appeared to have been really converted, so as to deceive God's people; but if their hearts could be seen, they would appear as black as ever. My accompanying angel bade me look for the travail of soul for sinners, as used to be. I looked, but could not see it, for the time for their salvation was past." Present Truth August, 1849, pp. 21, 22

In another vision she said: “I saw the Brother Stowell of Paris was wavering upon the shut door. I felt that I must visit them….We had free, powerful meetings with them. God gave me two visions while there, much to the comfort and strength of the brethren and sisters. BROTHER STOWELL WAS ESTABLISHED IN THE SHUT DOOR AND ALL THE PRESENT TRUTH HE HAD DOUBTED....We came to this place yesterday; found our dear Brother Nichols' family as well as usual, steadfast in the faith, and strong in all the present truth.... My accompanying angel bade me look for the travail of souls for sinners as used to be. I LOOKED BUT COULD NOT SEE IT FOR THE TIME FOR THEIR SALVATION IS PAST. Dear Brother and Sister, I have now written the vision God gave me. I am tired sitting so long. Our position looks very clear. WE KNOW WE HAVE THE TRUTH, THE MIDNIGHT CRY IS BEHIND US, THE DOOR WAS SHUT IN 1844 AND JESUS IS SOON TO STEP OUT FROM BETWEEN GOD AND MAN." Letter 5-1849, White Estate, (March 24-30, 1849), (emphasis added).

Clearly Ellen White’s visions were still confirming the ‘Shut door’ doctrine. Which can also be seen by the comment concerning Brother Nichols, who again was an avid teacher of the ‘shut door’ doctrine.

In July of 1850 some in the Adventist Movement including Ellen White began to believe that Christians who did not have knowledge of the 1844 movement could be converted, and take the place of the Adventists who had fallen. But to be saved they had to be ‘baptized into’ the Shut door doctrine. This is clearly seen in the following article James Bates.

“It is true, some persons that are ignorant of this message may, and undoubtedly will be saved if they die before Jesus leaves the Holiest. I mean those that were believers before 1844. Sinners and backsliders cannot get their names on the breast-plate of judgment now. God in infinite mercy has borne with our ignorance on this subject until now; and

our children have been neglected as they should not have been. Let us then do all that our hands find to do toward their salvation.--Review and Herald, January, 1851, p. 39.

The most damning piece of evidence is the Camden vision dated June 29, 1851. The White Estates says they doubt the authenticity of the vision because they say Ellen was not in Camden in June 29, 1851. Nevertheless, we have the following proof. In 1866, in the Review, Uriah Smith, editor of the paper, had a series of articles defending the visions of Ellen White. These articles were later printed in booklet form under the same title. On page 20 of the booklet, Smith says:

"Our only proper course here, therefore, is to confine ourselves to what has been published under sister White's own supervision, and by her own authority, and what appears in manuscript over her own signature in her own handwriting."

Further, this article by Smith was highly commended by the leading ministers, including J.N. Andrews. It was also read before the General and Michigan State conferences. With those endorsements in mind, we note in Smith's article of June 19, 1866, page 18, and reprinted on pages 27-28 of his booklet, these statements about the visions. The sentences that are emphasized are directly from the Camden vision:

".' 'HIS SPIRIT AND SYMPATHY ARE NOW WITHDRAWN FROM THE WORLD, AND OUR SYMPATHY SHOULD BE WITH HIM.' 'THE WICKED COULD NOT BE BENEFITTED BY OUR PRAYERS NOW.' 'THE WICKED WORLD WHOM GOD HAD REJECTED.' It seemed the whole world was taken in the snare; that there could not be one left, (referring to Spiritualism). 'The time for their salvation is past.'

There can be no doubt that Smith had a copy of the Camden Vision before him when he wrote the articles, and not only accepted it as authentic, but presumed the readers would too. We also note that the leading Adventists read and approved the articles for publication, and thereby accepted it as authentic. We note that Smith said that only those visions would be defended that were published under Ellen White's direction, or were approved by her, or appeared over her signature in her own handwriting. The Camden Vision would have to be accepted in that number. Any discrepancy in date is of no consequence, for whatever the date, the vision was authentic. It takes the same "shut door" position for Ellen White all the way from October, 1844, to sometime in 1851, and it was the "shut door" position that Smith was defending Ellen White against in the above section of his writing; that included the Camden vision. The following is that vision.

"Then I saw that Jesus prayed for his enemies; but that should not cause US or lead US to pray for THE WICKED WORLD, WHOM GOD HAD REJECTED - when he prayed for his enemies, there was hope for them, and they could be benefited and saved by his prayers, and also after he was a mediator in the outer apartment for the whole world; BUT NOW HIS SPIRIT AND SYMPATHY WERE WITHDRAWN FROM THE WORLD; AND OUR SYMPATHY MUST BE WITH JESUS, AND MUST BE WITHDRAWN FROM THE UNGODLY. I saw that God loved his people - and, in answer to prayers, would send rain upon the just and unjust - I saw that now, in this time, that he watered the earth and caused the sun to shine for the saints and wicked by our prayers, by our Father sending rain upon the unjust, while he sent it upon the just. I SAW THAT THE WICKED COULD NOT BE BENEFITTED BY OUR PRAYERS NOW - AND ALTHOUGH HE SENT IT UPON THE UNJUST, YET THEIR DAY WAS COMING....THEN I SAW CONCERNING LOVING OUR NEIGHBORS. I SAW

THAT SCRIPTURE DID NOT MEAN THE WICKED WHOM GOD HAD REJECTED THAT WE MUST LOVE, BUT HE MEANT OUR NEIGHBORS IN THE HOUSEHOLD, AND DID NOT EXTEND BEYOND THE HOUSEHOLD; YET I SAW THAT WE SHOULD NOT DO THE WICKED AROUND US ANY INJUSTICE; - BUT, OUR NEIGHBORS WHOM WE WERE TO LOVE, WERE THOSE WHO LOVED GOD AND WERE SERVING HIM...."

How did Elder Bates view the visions and work of Ellen White? He said this: "I believe the work [of Mrs. White] is of God, and is given to comfort and strengthen his scattered, torn and peeled people, since the closing up of our work for the world in October, 1844."

As the day drew near the 1851 deadline; in Ellen’s mind the time of Christ’s return was so close, that even the ‘angels of Ellen’ expected Jesus to return shortly.

"My accompanying angel said, 'Time is almost finished. Get ready, get ready, get ready.' . . . now time is almost finished. . . and what we have been years learning, they will have to learn in a few months." (Early Writings, pp. 64-67). June 1850

This in turn caused Mrs. White to announce time is almost finished: "Some are looking too far off for the coming of the Lord. Time has continued a few years longer than they expected, therefore they think it may continue a few years more. . . I saw that the time for Jesus to be in the Holy Place was nearly finished, and that time can not last but a little longer." ({ExV 46.1} 1851)

Please note dear reader that this is said early in 1851, according to the SDA doctrine Jesus had been in the Most Holy Place for but 6 years. Was His work there nearly finished? Was it even half way over? No, it had but begun! It was not even one thirtieth of the way over. The reason she said this is because she was expounding the false doctrine of Jesus’ return in the fall of 1851!

When Jesus did not appear in 1851 the little band of Adventists began their work of covering the visions of Ellen White.

Here is but one example: Elder J.N. Loughborough, in his book, "The Great Second Advent Movement," page 263, edition 1905, desired to give Elder Joseph Bates' testimony concerning Mrs. White's work, as given on page 21 of "A Word to the Little Flock," printed in 1847. The following illustrates the manner in which he uses the material from this early publication. He quotes:

"I believe the work [of Mrs. White] is of God, and is given to comfort and strengthen his scattered, torn and peeled people, since the closing up of our work. . . in October, 1844."

Note those three little dots? They mean that something was left out of the passage quoted. What was it? Just THREE SHORT WORDS: We will insert those words omitted from the lines quoted and indicate them [in uppercase letters]. Here they are:

"since the closing up of our work FOR THE WORLD in October, 1844." These three words reveal the fact that Bates and Elder White, who published the tract in 1847, believed that their work for the world closed up in October, 1844. The cover up of these truths have been great. Visions have been deleted and edited, and the meaning of some

changed. But the truth is out there for those who wish to seek for it. There are MANY eyewitness accounts by Christian men and women who testify in full agreement that Ellen prophesied that the door of mercy was shut for sinners.

Later in her life Ellen White tried to explain away her statements in the following manner.

“I am still a believer in the shut-door theory, but not in the sense in which we at first employed the term or in which it is employed by my opponents… I was shown in vision, and I still believe, that there was a shut door in 1844. All who saw the light of the first and second angels' messages and rejected that light, were left in darkness.{1SM 63.2-9}

Thus we see after 1851 the ‘shut door’ swung fully open for anyone, except for those who heard the Millerite message that Jesus was coming in 1844 and rejected it. I ask you dear reader, would you have accepted William Miller’s message that Jesus was coming in October of 1844? Even though Jesus said NO Man knows the hour, and that He was coming in a day when no one expected? I hope dear reader you would have stood by Gods word. Also I ask, Would God condemn forever those who rejected the false predictions that Christ was returning in 1844? Quite to the contrary, God says those who “Believe a lie… shall be damned”.

CONCLUSION

We have the written proof that up to 1850 the Advent band was teaching the door of mercy was shut for sinners. The record of what Ellen taught and prophesied is open before us, no amount of slanting the history of this era can hide the truth of what was actually taught during these years. The White Estate’s article on this subject tries to make the reader imagine that the Adventists were working for the souls of the sinners, yet in truth they were only laboring for the children and the Christian who had not heard of the ‘1844 Midnight Cry’. How can anyone believe with an honest heart, that God attended such a mistaken message? Not once rebuking their error, but rather strengthening it through vision? My friend, an honest man cannot believe this.

I recommend to the reader the books “Extensive Overview of the Shut Door” By Maurice Barnett and the “Life of Ellen White” by D.M. Canright. Both of which furnished many of these fascinating quotes.

Appendix B

The Horn of Littleness-Did he come from Italy?By Martin Eldon

martinthezman@hotmail.com

Some Adventist scholars, who believe that the little horn of Daniel 8 did not arise from Greece, as the symbol of the Goat indicates, have suggested that the little horn comes from one of the "four winds" of heaven, rather than out of one of the four horns. They claim the Hebrew allows for this possible interpretation. Let's investigate. Daniel 8:8,9 - ..and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven. And out of one of them came forth a little horn..."

In Hebrew, words can be feminine, masculine, or neutral. In Dan. 8:9, the word "them" is masculine. Since "horns" is feminine, and "winds" can be either masculine or feminine, SDA scholars have suggested the word "them" must refer to "winds". And they fervently contend, that the little horn arose out of one of the four winds.

Why does it matter? The SDA realizes that if the 'horn' came out of one of the four divisions of Greece then their foundational doctrine is not Biblical; so they must contend that the little horn came out of the 'wind', and of course they will explain that this 'wind' is the far west wind of Italy. We believe with just a little study of this issue that the reader will see that the SDA reasoning for this is unsubstantiated.

Does Daniel 8:8 even use the word "Horns"?

Daniel 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.

The actual Hebrew uses the term  "four chazuwth" or four 'appearances', the word horns is "qeren" in the Hebrew and it is not used in reference to the four divisions. Chazuwth is the word that Daniel uses and it is a neutral word, this simply means the word 'them' could easily refer to the "Chazuwth".

Also we must consider that the word "one" in Daniel 8:9 is feminine which would seem to link it back to the feminine "horns". Therefore, if we were to look only at linguistics, we cannot determine for certainty whether the little horn arose from the winds or the other horn.

But does it actually make a difference?

Actually it would not; it does not matter if the text read "And out of one of the four winds came forth a little horn" or "And out of one of the four notable ones came forth a little horn": Because it does not change the fact that the horn from littleness rose from one of the four Grecian provinces. Let me explain: The prophecy of Daniel 8 clearly teaches that at the death of the first king of Greece, the empire would be divided toward the four winds (in four directions); which simply means there would be a northern province, a southern province, an eastern province and a western province. And of course the

prophecy was fulfilled exactly; Ptolemy, began a dynasty in Egypt (South); and Seleucus did the same in Syria (North).  Lycemicus took over Asia Minor (east) and Cassander took Mesopotamia (West).

Instead of referring to these provinces by name Daniel refers to them by their wind (direction). For example he refers to Syria and Egypt as the North and South in the following verses.

Daniel 11:4-6  "And when he has arisen, his kingdom shall be broken up and divided toward the four winds of heaven… Also the king of the South shall become strong… the daughter of the king of the South shall go to the king of the North to make an agreement…

The SDA Bible commentary will also agree that the 'North' is Syria, and the South is Egypt in these verses.  Thus we see that out of one of the four winds, would mean the same thing as out of one of the four horns; which would simply mean out of one of the four provinces of Greece.

Those who insist that the 'horn of littleness' of Daniel 8 is the Roman Papacy run into quite a few difficulties.

First they must have a horn that is not attached to a beast, come growing out of the west wind. A student of prophecy will quickly note that this is impossible. Horns represent kings, kings come out of kingdoms, and there cannot be a king without a kingdom. Beasts represent kingdoms and the only two kingdoms mentioned in Daniel 8 are Persia and Greece.

Second, the SDA teaches that the little horn is the Papacy. The Papacy came up out of the Roman beast among 10 other horns. Rome was not divided until 476 AD; the Papacy cannot be said to have appeared on the world's stage as a 'horn' prior to this. Yet this 'horn of littleness' comes up at the latter end of the Grecian Empire, which fell around 160 BC (Daniel 8:23).

Thirdly, the first move of this 'horn of littleness' is to go against the South; if Rome literally went south it would be in the sea. If 'South' is symbolic of Egypt, then this description does not fit Rome, because Egypt was not its first conquest.

The meaning of the vision of Daniel 8 is too simple to ignore. Greece would be divided into four provinces and in the latter days of the Grecian Empire a King from one of the four provinces would attack the Judea and cause 2300 sacrifices 'evening and morning' to cease; then the sanctuary would be put right again. The following are some Bible translations that clearly show that the 'horn of littleness' came out of one of the four provinces of Greece.

Daniel 8:8-9 The goat became very powerful. But at the height of its power, its large horn was broken off. In the large horn's place grew four prominent horns pointing in the four directions of the earth. From one of the prominent horns came a small horn whose power grew very great. It extended toward the south and the east and toward the glorious land of Israel. (NLT)

Daniel 8:8-9  So the male goat became very great. But when he was strong, his big horn broke off and four horns grew in place of the one big horn. Those four horns pointed in four different directions and were easy to see. Then a little horn grew from one of those four horns, and it became very big. It grew to the south, the east, and toward the beautiful land of Judah. (NCV)

Daniel 8:8-9 The goat grew more and more arrogant, but at the height of his power his horn was broken. In its place four prominent horns came up, each pointing in a different direction. Out of one of these four horns grew a little horn, whose power extended towards the south and the east and towards the Promised Land. (GNB)

Daniel 8:8-9 The male goat became very important. But when the goat became powerful, his large horn broke off. In its place grew four horns. They corre-sponded to the four winds of heaven. 9 Out of one of the horns came a small horn. It gained power over the south, the east, and the beautiful land.  (GWTB)

Daniel 8:8-9  'And the young he-goat hath exerted itself very much, and when it is strong, broken hath been the great horn; and come up doth a vision of four in its place, at the four winds of the heavens. And from the one of them come forth hath a little horn, and it exerteth itself greatly toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the beauteous land; (YLT)