Virus protection for the mind.
Register Now!
Login
Welcome to HeavenlySanctuary.com
Thursday, August 28 2008 @ 12:04 PM PDT
   

1844 and the Investigative Judgment

Adventist Today is having a series of articles on 1844, The Gospel, and the Judgment, which will parallel the SDA quarterly. The following article was written by Brad Cole of HeavenlySanctuary.com, who is contributing to this series. To also view the thoughts of Raymond Cottrell, Jack Sequeira and Desmond Ford, go to AToday.com.

"I appreciate that this quarterly, which hopes to address the issues that relate to 1844 and the investigative judgment, opens with a description of the war that began in heaven. The Heavenly Sanctuary initially became defiled before the creation of this earth and in God’s very presence. For this reason, the concept of a cleansing of the sanctuary can only be understood when we know what defiled it in the first place.

There are 2 closely related issues which lie at the foundation of this war and which resulted in the defiling of the sanctuary:



1. Distortion and misrepresentation of God’s supremely gracious, kind, and forgiving character.

2. Distortion and misrepresentation of God’s principle upon which the entire universe is designed to operate: selfless, other-centered love.

On both accounts, Satan has successfully intruded his character and his principle in place of the character and principle of the true God.

“From the beginning it has been Satan’s studied plan to cause men to forget God, that he might secure them to himself. Hence he has sought to misrepresent the character of God, to lead men to cherish a false conception of Him. The Creator has been presented to their minds as clothed with the attributes of the prince of evil himself,–as arbitrary, severe, and unforgiving,–that He might be feared, shunned, and even hated by men. Satan hoped to so confuse the minds of those whom he had deceived that they would put God out of their knowledge.” (E.G. White, Testimonies for the Church, vol. 5, p. 738)

The correct understanding and application of God’s character and the principle of his kingdom should be at the heart of every doctrine, because it is the successful resolution of these two issues that will win the war, cleanse the sanctuary, and bring this conflict to a close. I will give two illustrations of how this applies to some of our most fundamental beliefs.

The Sabbath – A monument to the truth about God’s character

In the midst of this war over the character of God, the decision was made to create planet earth, a place that is a “spectacle for the whole world of angels…” (1 Corinthians 4:9 – GN). Amidst Satan’s charges that God is a restrictive tyrant, God majestically created the earth and the human race – a people with absolute freedom, the ability to create, and who were to represent and reflect the very character of God. “Let us make human beings in our image, make them reflecting our nature’…God created human beings; he created them godlike, reflecting God’s nature.” (Genesis 1:26,27 – The Message). And then God turned to the on-looking universe and said, so to speak, “I rest my case! Do you still believe Satan’s lies about me?” And we are encouraged to spend every 7th day in review of the evidence of God’s character and to enter into intimacy with our Creator.

And, when Jesus died on the Cross just after forgiving those who tortured him to death, he rested on the Sabbath, as if to once again say to us and the entire universe, “I rest my case! Any more questions? Are you now settled into the truth about the kind of Person I am?” When seen in this light, the Sabbath becomes a day of great meaning as we longingly reflect on the character of our God.

The life and death of Jesus – the ultimate proof of God’s character and principle

Jesus came as “the revealer of the character of God” (E.G. White, DA 108.1). “Christ came to represent the Father. We behold in him the image of the invisible God. He clothed his divinity with humanity, and came to the world that the erroneous ideas Satan had been the means of creating in the minds of men, in regard to the character of God, might be removed….” (E.G. White, Signs of the Times, January 20, 1890 par. 5)

But beyond his mission to represent the character of God, Jesus also came to convincingly reveal the great single principle upon which he governs the entire universe - unselfishness:

“Unselfishness, the principle of God’s kingdom, is the principle that Satan hates; its very existence he denies. From the beginning of the great controversy he has endeavored to prove God’s principles of action to be selfish, and he deals in the same way with all who serve God. To disprove Satan’s claim is the work of Christ and of all who bear His name. It was to give in His own life an illustration of unselfishness that Jesus came in the form of humanity. And all who accept this principle are to be workers together with Him in demonstrating it in practical life.” (E. G. White, Education 154)

As we witness the God of the universe selflessly laying down his life, one cannot help but to contrast this with the selfishness and pride of Satan who would even stoop so low as to kill God in the flesh. The result? The revelation of God’s true character convinces us of the rightness of his principle of selfless love and we naturally enter into a trusting and healing relationship with God.

1844

So how does all of this relate to the movement that began in 1844 and what would it mean to cleanse the sanctuary? What is the Gospel and what does it have to do with judgment? The answers to these questions bring us right back to the central issues: the vindication of God’s character and the principle of his kingdom. When these issues are seen clearly, and when the character of God and his guiding principle is lived out in the lives of his friends on earth, the temple will have been cleansed and the end will be at hand."

·

What's Related

1844 and the Investigative Judgment | 112 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. HeavenlySanctuary.com is not responsible for what they say.
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Stan Ermshar onSaturday, July 01 2006 @ 06:20 PM PDT
I still don't undersand why so many are still trying to find some way to justify an unbiblical date and somehow sanitize a doctrine that should really be discarded. I agree with Raymond Cottrell in his article "Sanctuary Doctrine:Asset or Liability" that there is absolutely no Biblical basis for 1844 and the Investigative Judgment.

I grew up in the strictest branch of Adventism. I used to have nightmares about the description of the Investigative Judgment as written by Ellen White in "Great Controversy". That is an evil doctrine that so clearly denies the gospel and destroys a believer's assurance of salvation. Any idea of a believer facing a judgment flies right in the face of Jesus' clear words in John 5:24:

24Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

The believer HAS ETERNAL LIFE NOW! How could eternal life possibly be lost while a careful examination of the books of record are being conducted. This is the doctrine as taught by Ellen White, and I keep seeing evangelical attempts to instead turn this doctrine into a "vindication of God's character". God is totally sovereign. He doesn't need to be proved "just" before the universe. Notice what Romans 9:19-25 says:

19You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" 20But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" 21Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honored use and another for dishonorable use? 22What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory-- 24even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles? "

Who is man to question God? Why does He need vindication?

Also, Ellen's vision of Jesus going from the Holy Place into the Most Holy Place in 1844 can be proven to be a false vision just with a simple reading of Hebrews 9. If that event did not happen, then Ellen's vision was false, and any idea that she was a prophet of God is gone. Hebrews 9:11ff:

11But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come,[e] then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. 13For if the sprinkling of defiled persons with the blood of goats and bulls and with the ashes of a heifer sanctifies[f] for the purification of the flesh, 14how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our[g] conscience from dead works to serve the living God.

So as Raymond Cottrell and Des Ford have said, it is time to admit that this doctrine is in error and move on.

I see all these attempts to justify and sanitize this doctrine as further destroying the credibility of the SDA church.

Stan Ermshar
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Greg onSaturday, July 01 2006 @ 10:08 PM PDT

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." -John 3:16 ESV

"For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." -Romans 6:23 ESV

"For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast." -Ephesians 2:8-9 ESV

If salvation is a free gift of God to be received in faith, why does He need to "investigate" whether we are worthy of receiving the gift?

Answer: He doesn't.

"Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God." -John 3:18 ESV

Now what what really happened in 1844?

Greg

1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Tim onSunday, July 02 2006 @ 05:31 AM PDT
Stan,

I am sorry that you have been traumatized by what some have taught about the investigative judgment. I too had a very difficult time with many of the traditional theories about it, at least the way they were presented in Academy and College. But, I don't find that Ford has brought any light to the subject and in fact has added layers of darkness to confuse and obscure ones ability to see God more clearly.

What if you were to reconsider your definition of the Sanctuary discussed in Daniel 8:14 from simply a physical location in heaven to instead the other Sanctuary the Bible talks about (which our pioneers also overlooked when they claimed the Bible teaches only one sanctuary in existence in 1844 and that being in heaven), namely the Sanctuary of the human soul. "Know ye not that you are a Temple of the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit lives within you?"

Do you recognize a need for the cleansing of the Soul Temple in preparation for meeting Jesus when He comes in the clouds?

What I find interesting is that people like Ford, are so willing to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Instead of stepping back and saying okay, are there aspects of this doctrine that have not been explained adequately? Are there aspects that are reliable? And keep what is accuarate and reliable and update what is now better understood. Instead, when they find areas which they have difficulty with and throw out the entire thing as false. I don't believe that can be supprted from scripture especially in light of Daniel 7 and 8.

However, I do agree that there needs to be some reexplanation of the meaning of Daneil 7 & 8 as many of the traditional explanations do harm to the truth about God and may actually be a barrier to coming to know God and experiencing eternal life.

Tim
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Greg onSunday, July 02 2006 @ 07:04 AM PDT
Let's not forget that the doctrine of the investigative judgment as originally endorsed by Ellen White has been re-cast by this website and other modern Adventists who found the original doctrine distasteful or unbiblical. As an example, here is what Ellen White said about the IJ in "The Great Controversy":

“As the books of record are opened in the judgment, the lives of all who have believed on Jesus come in review before God. Beginning with those who first lived upon the earth, our Advocate presents the cases of each successive generation, and closes with the living. Every name is mentioned, every case closely investigated. Names are accepted, names rejected. When any have sins remaining upon the books of record, unrepented and unforgiven, their names will be blotted out of the book of life, and the record of their good deeds will be erased from the book of God’s remembrance” (pg. 549, 1940 edition).

Later she clarifies what transpires during the investigative judgment, “Day after day, passing into eternity, bears its burden of records for the books of heaven. Words once spoken, deeds once done, can never be recalled. Angels have registered both the good and the evil. The mightiest conqueror upon the earth can not call back the record of even a single day. Our acts, our words, even our most secret motives, all have their weight in deciding our destiny for weal or woe. Though they may be forgotten by us, they will bear their testimony to justify or to condemn” (pg. 552, 1940 edition).

Elsewhere Ellen White called the sanctuary doctrine and the investigative judgment the foundational planks upon which the church was built. If this foundation is now reinterpreted in a fundamentally different way than the pioneers had intended, the implied message is that Ellen White was wrong about this doctrine. But instead of calling her prophetic status into question, many are motivated to preserve her and quietly sweep her unbiblical teaching under the carpet while retaining the doctrine in name only. This is like finding a crack in the foundatioin of a house and covering it over with paint so nobody knows it's there. Either way, the house is still in jeopardy. Better to undo the damage that currently exists than to make it worse by formulating an explanation that implies nothing is wrong.

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." -John 3:16 ESV

"For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." -Romans 6:23 ESV

"For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast." -Ephesians 2:8-9 ESV

If God gives salvation as a free gift today to those who will receive it by faith, why does he need to hold a trial of professed Christ-followers to "investigate" those given the gift so he can reveal to the "heavenly intelligences" those who really deserve it? This is akin to giving a child a Christmas present only to take it back from him until a list of all the year's actions can be reviewed to decide whether he really deserves it. In other words, if God gives the gift, the implication is He wants us to receive it! Any doctrine that obscures or reverses this gift is not of God.

"Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God." -John 3:18 ESV

Greg

1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Tim onSunday, July 02 2006 @ 09:00 AM PDT
Greg,

As is always the case with all inspired writings, we must ask two questions - "What was said (or written)" AND "What does it mean" and what does it mean in the context of the times it was written. Consider the history of the protestant reformation – EGW endorses Martin Luther as an instrument of God in working to bring people back to the truth. (Most Protestants agree with this). But she goes on to say that coming out of so much darkness it wasn’t possible, nor expected that he would comprehend and undo all the errors that had crept in over 1000 years, thus other reformers followed. She recognized truth as unfolding. By using the reasoning you suggest one could argue that because Martin Luther failed to uncover the truth about Sabbath and baptism etc. that he was a false reformer and wasn’t led by God’s Spirit and we should return to the church of Rome.

But because we recognize truth unfolds over time we build on what has been revealed and rather than throw out the reforms Martin Luther brought we keep what he got right and add to it as the Holy Spirit reveals more truth. This process did not end with Martin Luther but continued and EGW is included. She herself wrote about it:

“There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. {CW 35.2}
“We are living in perilous times, and it does not become us to accept everything claimed to be truth without examining it thoroughly; neither can we afford to reject anything that bears the fruits of the Spirit of God; but we should be teachable, meek and lowly of heart. There are those who oppose everything that is not in accordance with their own ideas, and by so doing they endanger their eternal interest as verily as did the Jewish nation in their rejection of Christ.” {CW 35.3}

I do not see the time frame of Daniel 8:14 being wrong, nor do I see a problem with the cleansing of the sanctuary, nor the idea of a cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary, nor the idea that individual records are being cleansed. All of this is reasonable and supported by the Scriptures. The problem Ford and others like him have in understanding this doctrine is they try to understand it in the context of a forensic atonement and with misconceptions about God and the GC. When this doctrine is understood in the context of the GC over God, His methods and character and His plan to actually heal and transform us (His Temple) then this cleansing, prior to our meeting Him, is quite coherent and one realizes the records in heaven are mere reflections of what is actually happening in us. Like medical records record the condition of the patient and as the patient is healed so the records reveal it. The heavenly records are cleansed by cleansing us from lies about God and the fear and selfishness that ensues from those lies. Forensic atonement always comes up short because it fails to provide a real remedy.

There is no crack in the foundation when one recognizes the foundation is the truth about God laid by Jesus Christ as the chief cornerstone and it is that foundation, the foundation of His character which is to be reproduced in His Temple – thus cleansing the temple prior to coming to get us.

Tim

1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Tim onSunday, July 02 2006 @ 09:02 AM PDT
Greg,

As is always the case with all inspired writings, we must ask two questions - "What was said (or written)" AND "What does it mean" and what does it mean in the context of the times it was written. Consider the history of the protestant reformation – EGW endorses Martin Luther as an instrument of God in working to bring people back to the truth. (Most Protestants agree with this). But she goes on to say that coming out of so much darkness it wasn’t possible, nor expected that he would comprehend and undo all the errors that had crept in over 1000 years, thus other reformers followed. She recognized truth as unfolding. By using the reasoning you suggest one could argue that because Martin Luther failed to uncover the truth about Sabbath and baptism etc. that he was a false reformer and wasn’t led by God’s Spirit and we should return to the church of Rome.

But because we recognize truth unfolds over time we build on what has been revealed and rather than throw out the reforms Martin Luther brought we keep what he got right and add to it as the Holy Spirit reveals more truth. This process did not end with Martin Luther but continued and EGW is included. She herself wrote about it:

“There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. {CW 35.2}
“We are living in perilous times, and it does not become us to accept everything claimed to be truth without examining it thoroughly; neither can we afford to reject anything that bears the fruits of the Spirit of God; but we should be teachable, meek and lowly of heart. There are those who oppose everything that is not in accordance with their own ideas, and by so doing they endanger their eternal interest as verily as did the Jewish nation in their rejection of Christ.” {CW 35.3}

I do not see the time frame of Daniel 8:14 being wrong, nor do I see a problem with the cleansing of the sanctuary, nor the idea of a cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary, nor the idea that individual records are being cleansed. All of this is reasonable and supported by the Scriptures. The problem Ford and others like him have in understanding this doctrine is they try to understand it in the context of a forensic atonement and with misconceptions about God and the GC. When this doctrine is understood in the context of the GC over God, His methods and character and His plan to actually heal and transform us (His Temple) then this cleansing, prior to our meeting Him, is quite coherent and one realizes the records in heaven are mere reflections of what is actually happening in us. Like medical records record the condition of the patient and as the patient is healed so the records reveal it. The heavenly records are cleansed by cleansing us from lies about God and the fear and selfishness that ensues from those lies. Forensic atonement always comes up short because it fails to provide a real remedy.

There is no crack in the foundation when one recognizes the foundation is the truth about God laid by Jesus Christ as the chief cornerstone and it is that foundation, the foundation of His character which is to be reproduced in His Temple – thus cleansing the temple prior to coming to get us.

Tim

1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Greg onSunday, July 02 2006 @ 10:20 AM PDT
Tim,

Are you saying that Ellen White was wrong in her presentation of the
investigative judgment doctrine as recorded in "The Great Controversy?" Recall
that she said this doctrine was endorsed by God through divine revalation.

Greg
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Tim onSunday, July 02 2006 @ 10:35 AM PDT
I'm sorry it didn't come across more clearly. No I do not believe EGW was wrong in what was revealed to her by God, but just like Daniel and John and Ezekiel and other prophets she did not fully comprehend what was revealed to her.

Now are you saying that if a prophet doesn't fully comprehend what has been revealed to him or her then what was revealed is not from God? Or such a person is a false prophet?

Tim
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Greg onSunday, July 02 2006 @ 07:38 PM PDT

Tim,

Are saying that Ellen White wasn't wrong at the time she received her visions endorsing the investigative judgment, but in looking back with 150+ years of history and biblical scholarship, she's now wrong?

When she said the planks of Adventism were the doctrines of the sanctuary and the investigative judgment, was she wrong? When she said that every thought, word, unconfessed sin, unimproved opportunity may disqualify professed Christ-followers from heaven, she was wrong? Or partially right? This is just the kind of confusing double-speak that keeps people enslaved to those who presume to speak for God. In this case, many presume to speak for the prophet who presumed to speak for God, but the point is the same. Ellen White's work is apparently completely malleable to whatever situation or doctrine those handling her words want to support.

If Ellen was so glaringly wrong about the investigative judgment so as to subvert the true gospel message, what else was she wrong about?

In admitting that Ellen White "didn't understand" everything she was shown, we are left with two possible conclusions. Either the visions she claimed to receive were not from God, or God is a poor communicator.

The biblical prophets are a completely different case because they acknolwedged when they did not understand something, where Ellen was definite and forceful. She never equivocated on the investigative judgment doctrine. Generations of Adventists have grown up with the historical version of the investigative judgment that you and others here are trying to re-cast into something completely different. Yet those who have stayed true to the doctrine as Ellen White taught it have either left the church or are busy teaching their kids, by your own admission, the same error.

Greg

1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Stan Ermshar onSunday, July 02 2006 @ 09:11 PM PDT
And to add to Greg's point, for anyone who believed that Ellen didn't understand her visions, you only have to read the story of Albion Ballenger, who got from scripture alone that the atonement was finished at the cross, and Christ entered the Most Holy Place at His ascension. Just read how strongly Ellen White influenced the trial of Ballenger:

The trial began on May 21, 1905, during the General Conference session. Ballenger was permitted to present his views on the Sanctuary to the leading brethren of the SDA Church. Ballenger arrived at the trial ready to make a defense from the Bible for his teachings. In his own words he describes what happened next:

"Immediately I had begun reading scriptures in proof of my position that the term 'within the veil' of Heb. 6:19 referred to the holy of holies of the true sanctuary, the committee began to bombard me with quotations from the writings of E.G. White.
"I begged them to show me my error from the Word alone, as I could not offer the writings of Mrs. White to the general public as authority in support of any position. It was finally agreed to use the scriptures only in dealing with the matter. But notwithstanding this solemn agreement, the first man to reply, Eld. S.N. Haskell, commenced, and continued unrebuked, to quote the writings of Mrs. White against me."8

One day before the trial was to end, Mrs. White sent a letter to those in attendance at the trial. In this letter, instead of asking the brethren to carefully evaluate Ballenger's theories against the Bible, she instead appeals to their fears:

"In clear, plain language I am to say to those in attendance at this conference that Brother Ballenger has been allowing his mind to receive and believe specious error. He has been misinterpreting and misapplying the Scriptures upon which he has fastened his mind. He is building up theories that are not founded in truth. A warning is now to come to him and to the people, for God has not indited the message that he is bearing. This message, if accepted, would undermine the pillars of our faith."9
Mrs. White is clearly alarmed that this message could undermine the foundation of the entire movement. She adds:
"Those who try to bring in theories that would remove the pillars of our faith concerning the sanctuary or concerning the personality of God or of Christ, are working as blind men."10
These warnings must have raised alarm among the brethren present. If this doctrine were to be accepted, it could undermine and destroy the very denomination that was paying their salaries. Mrs. White further warns that "many" would leave the church if these doctrines were accepted:
"If the theories that Brother Ballenger presents were received, they would lead many to depart from the faith. They would counterwork the truths upon which the people of God have stood for the past fifty years. I am bidden to say in the name of the Lord that Elder Ballenger is following a false light. The Lord has not given him the message that he is bearing regarding the sanctuary service."11
If "many" were to leave the church, then the leaders' jobs, their influence, and their position would all be in jeopardy. Finally, Mrs. White claims the "Instructor" had spoken to Ballenger about the situation:
"Our Instructor spoke words to Brother Ballenger: 'You are bringing in confusion and perplexity by your interpretation of the Scriptures. You think that you have been given new light, but your light will become darkness to those who receive it.'"12
Faced with these dire predictions, what could the brethren do other than rule against Ballenger? Even if Ballenger's arguments held some merit, how could they allow him to continue when it might lead to the destruction of their denomination? If Mrs. White was correct, Ballenger's teachings threatened to destroy everything they had spent their whole lives building up. Ballenger had to be stopped! SDA minister M.L. Andreasen, an eyewitness to the hearing, acknowledges Ellen White's leading role in the defrocking. He wrote that the decision to defrock Ballenger was based on...
"the Spirit of Prophecy and their [the ministers meeting with Ballenger] own convictions."13
In the end, it was Mrs. White's testimony that turned the tide against Ballenger and ensured his dismissal. What was the final reason given for his dismissal? M.L. Andreasen shares the following:
"He was dismissed from the church because of theological differences...[for] teaching that the atonement was made on the cross!"14

Stan

1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Stan Ermshar onSunday, July 02 2006 @ 11:51 PM PDT
And to add to Greg's point, if anyone thinks that Ellen White didn't understand what this issue was about, just consider what happened to Albion Ballenger, when he found from his study of the scriptures, that Christ went into the most holy place at his ascension instead of 1844. Here is an excerpt from Ballenger's book "Cast out for the Cross of Christ":

The trial began on May 21, 1905, during the General Conference session. Ballenger was permitted to present his views on the Sanctuary to the leading brethren of the SDA Church. Ballenger arrived at the trial ready to make a defense from the Bible for his teachings. In his own words he describes what happened next:

"Immediately I had begun reading scriptures in proof of my position that the term 'within the veil' of Heb. 6:19 referred to the holy of holies of the true sanctuary, the committee began to bombard me with quotations from the writings of E.G. White.
"I begged them to show me my error from the Word alone, as I could not offer the writings of Mrs. White to the general public as authority in support of any position. It was finally agreed to use the scriptures only in dealing with the matter. But notwithstanding this solemn agreement, the first man to reply, Eld. S.N. Haskell, commenced, and continued unrebuked, to quote the writings of Mrs. White against me."8

One day before the trial was to end, Mrs. White sent a letter to those in attendance at the trial. In this letter, instead of asking the brethren to carefully evaluate Ballenger's theories against the Bible, she instead appeals to their fears:

"In clear, plain language I am to say to those in attendance at this conference that Brother Ballenger has been allowing his mind to receive and believe specious error. He has been misinterpreting and misapplying the Scriptures upon which he has fastened his mind. He is building up theories that are not founded in truth. A warning is now to come to him and to the people, for God has not indited the message that he is bearing. This message, if accepted, would undermine the pillars of our faith."9
Mrs. White is clearly alarmed that this message could undermine the foundation of the entire movement. She adds:
"Those who try to bring in theories that would remove the pillars of our faith concerning the sanctuary or concerning the personality of God or of Christ, are working as blind men."10
These warnings must have raised alarm among the brethren present. If this doctrine were to be accepted, it could undermine and destroy the very denomination that was paying their salaries. Mrs. White further warns that "many" would leave the church if these doctrines were accepted:
"If the theories that Brother Ballenger presents were received, they would lead many to depart from the faith. They would counterwork the truths upon which the people of God have stood for the past fifty years. I am bidden to say in the name of the Lord that Elder Ballenger is following a false light. The Lord has not given him the message that he is bearing regarding the sanctuary service."11
If "many" were to leave the church, then the leaders' jobs, their influence, and their position would all be in jeopardy. Finally, Mrs. White claims the "Instructor" had spoken to Ballenger about the situation:
"Our Instructor spoke words to Brother Ballenger: 'You are bringing in confusion and perplexity by your interpretation of the Scriptures. You think that you have been given new light, but your light will become darkness to those who receive it.'"12
Faced with these dire predictions, what could the brethren do other than rule against Ballenger? Even if Ballenger's arguments held some merit, how could they allow him to continue when it might lead to the destruction of their denomination? If Mrs. White was correct, Ballenger's teachings threatened to destroy everything they had spent their whole lives building up. Ballenger had to be stopped! SDA minister M.L. Andreasen, an eyewitness to the hearing, acknowledges Ellen White's leading role in the defrocking. He wrote that the decision to defrock Ballenger was based on...
"the Spirit of Prophecy and their [the ministers meeting with Ballenger] own convictions."13
In the end, it was Mrs. White's testimony that turned the tide against Ballenger and ensured his dismissal. What was the final reason given for his dismissal? M.L. Andreasen shares the following:
"He was dismissed from the church because of theological differences...[for] teaching that the atonement was made on the cross!"14

So Ellen White CLEARLY understood what this battle was about. She knew that the integrity of her prophetic office was at stake, as well as the foundation of the SDA church.

Stan

1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Tim onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 04:31 AM PDT
Greg & Stan,

As I see it, the difficulty you might be struggling with is that you are more concerned with EGW that you are with the truth about God. Neither of you have answered the question I have posed. In these posts I haven't seen any interest in actually growing in understanding about God's plan to heal and restore. Rather I have seen angry and hurt individuals who are bent on diverting the focus away from the truth about God to attack a woman who was used by God to promote the gospel.

You claim that Christ entered the MH place when he ascended, you claim that EGW was different than the other Bible prophets because she spoke emphatically. Well lets talk about Paul, he spoke emphatically in Hebrews that Christ entered the MH place on ascension and he also spoke emphatically that they were living in the time of the end. Was Paul wrong when he said they were living in the time of the end? Was he misleading the people? Or did he not fully comprehend what he had been shown and thinking that they were living in the time of the end he understood that Christ would have to be in the MH place prior to His return so he ASSUMED, based on his belief that AD 70 was the time of the end, that Christ was in the MH place? What if Paul simply made that assumption based on his erroneous belief that they were living in the time of the end? That he was shown Christ's work at the end of time, but he failed to recognize it would be almost 2000 years later? Oh, let us not consider that possiblity because then the theories of Ford and others would suddenly collapse. Better to have confidence in Ford, who has shown no evidence of God's special gift of prophecy and reject EGW who God abundantly revealed to be inspired by Him.

So are you two interested in growth in truth and the knowledge of God or is it all about casting stones and dispersions on EGW? I can assure you for every problem you think you have with EGW I can show you more with the prophets of the Bible. Do you want to play that game? Go ahead, show me another problem with EGW and I will show you the same thing with a Bible prophet.

So why don't we get off the stone throwing and instead ask the questions that are relevent in helping us take the truth about God to the world?

Tim
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Tim onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 04:44 AM PDT
Stan,

Regarding Ballenger, I can see why you and Ford and others must work to discredit EGW, for if you hold the views Ballenger does and EGW is not discredited then you also would be blind and leading people to destruction. So I can see why the focus must be attacking EGW. I feel sorry for those who are in this positoin, how sad.

I happen to agree with EGW and believe she was inspired by God and as I have with the Bible, when I think I have some "light" which is opposed to the Bible or when I think I find some "contradiction" within the Bible, I go and reexamine my position and find that it was my understanding that was in error, not God's inspired Word. Are you willing to reexamine your position to see where understanding can be grown so confidence in the messages provided by EGW can be restored?

Tim
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Greg onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 06:31 AM PDT
Tim,

You have sidestepped the issue that Ellen White claimed to receive direct revelation from God who confirmed to her on multiple occasions that in 1844, Jesus Christ entered the Most Holy Place to carry out a work of investigative judgment, not to vindicate His character, but to examine under the microscope the lives of professed Christ-followers. You say she was used by God to promote the gospel, yet this doctrine has kept generations of Adventists in theological darkness, creating the foundation for a works-righteousness system that is still practiced in the historic branch of the church. You seem content to use Ellen White in whatever way you can to promote your version of Adventism while ignoring the large body of the church who actually believes what she wrote the way she originally authored it. You don't address the problems that Ellen White has caused for these people who live in constant fear of the judgment.

Even worse, you now want to make this a battle between Ellen White and the inspired biblical writers. I find it incredible that you are willing to speculate about the apostle Paul's "end times" focus to the point of casting doubt on the veracity of Hebrews 9. How is it more reasonable to promote a sanitized version of what you imply is Ellen White's error on the investigative judgment while simultaneously casting aside the inspired words of Scripture to support your theories?

Tim, you say you are interested in knowing the truth about God, yet you are busy obscuring the very truth He has revealed about Himself in the Bible.

"Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world." -Hebrews 1:1-2 ESV

What you would have us believe is that what God revealed about Himself through Jesus Christ required more explanation than what the inspired biblical writers were able to provide. Instead of studying and submitting yourself to these words, you advocate interpreting them through the light of what a nineteenth-century woman said she received directly from God in vision. Worse, you say she herself didn't understand these visions, so you are now ready to clear everything up by showing us where both she and the Bible are in error.

Ellen White would have openly rebuked you for taking such a position, as she did Ballenger.

Furthermore, if both the Bible and Ellen White are in error, you have effectively set yourself up as the final arbiter of truth. Under this paradigm, it is impossible to arrive at any conclusion because the Bible cannot be used to test Ellen White's writings or any other wind of doctrine that comes along. If the Bible is so full of error, how do you even know which parts of it to trust?

Greg
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Tim onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 07:50 AM PDT
Greg,

I will try again to address your issues, but I would like to know, are you willing to listen?

I do believe EGW received revelation from God. I do not believe her ministry has cause people to be “in theological darkness” any theological darkness has been the misuse of her writings, which occurs everyday with the Bible as well. Or don’t you think millions are in theological darkness while using only the Bible to support their darkness?

There is no battle between the Bible writers and EGW they are in complete harmony – the battle is in people who have rejected what she wrote because such people are in darkness so they must work to discredit her because they cannot accept the darkness they are in.

I also take offense at your allegation that I am interpreting the Bible writers through EGW, not at all. I interpret the writings of EGW through the Bible. I understand why you think that, but that is only because you do not allow an interpretation of Scripture that differs from your own. If you would allow the interpretation of Scripture which I offered, and which is completely reasonable given the evidence, then you could see harmony between the two. But if you reject alternate views then you relegate yourself into a corner in which only you can be right. I also find it interesting that you know what I think and that you know what EGW would say if she were here, quite a bold statement.

Also, making inflammatory allegations that I claim the Bible and EGW are in error does not help bring light and clarity but only causes greater tension and confusion. Since you have made the allegation I will state clearly I do not believe the Bible or EGW are in error. In fact, I have been trying to demonstrate all along the reliability of Scripture and the writings of EGW, when properly understood. I have found that some have difficulty along these lines because they struggle with the ability to think in abstract ways and people locked into concrete operations and black and white thinking often fail to gain the insights needed to bring unity on these issues.

So back to the real issue, why are you so angry at EGW and the SDA church and this picture of God?

Tim


1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Greg onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 09:21 AM PDT
Tim,

In re-reading my post, I agree the tone was pretty harsh and for that I apologize.

You have said that you believe the Bible and Ellen White are in complete harmony but to come to this conclusion you have had to bring down the apostle Paul by casting doubt on the book of Hebrews. This is what is simply unbelievable. If the Bible is full of error, it can be in harmony with any book! A Mormon could make this statement and by your logic, appear credible.

Am I to understand you correctly that anyone who believes what Ellen White claimed to receive from God about the investigative judgment is misinterpreting her? That someone who sits down with The Great Controversy and becomes convicted that they need to recall every unconfessed sin or they won't be in heaven is actually misusing her work? I don't presume to speak for Ellen White, but it's not a far stretch at all to assume she would rebuke anyone who so fundamentally changed the words she claimed to receive from God.

You say the Bible and Ellen White are in complete harmony, but how can you harmonize the investigative judgment doctrine as Ellen White taught it with John 5:24? Ellen White said that faith in Jesus was just the beginning, qualifying the believer for a comprehensive investigation of every word, action, thought, unimproved opportunity, etc. Yet Jesus says this: "whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life."

To say that Ellen White and the Bible agree on this point is quite a stretch, wouldn't you say? How would you approach a historic Adventist who is teaching their children the investigative judgment doctrine as given by Ellen White? What would you do with John 5:24?

You say the real issue is my anger, but this is really an attempt to deflect any valid criticisms I have made back on me. You have not really addressed these criticisms other than to say the biblical writers are just as imperfect as Ellen White was, which leaves us in a worse position than when we started because now we can't trust the words of Scripture.

Greg
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Tim onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 11:37 AM PDT
Greg,

Thanks for the change in tone and a willingness to dialogue further. For those who have as their agenda to grow in grace and truth, your questions are quite fair and reasonable, but for those who have as their agenda to “prove” EGW unreliable then your questions are not questions to gain enlightenment but questions to stir up doubt and controversy.

I will make the assumption that your questions are from a sincere heart of someone who is searching and has legitimate areas that don’t make sense and is seeking resolution to these seemingly conflicting issues.

First, you and I may differ in our understanding of inspiration. The way you reacted to my interpretation of Paul’s position in Hebrews indicates that you believe if my position was correct then somehow the credibility of Scripture is undermined. Maybe it would be helpful to clarify how we see inspiration. I believe God inspires people with ideas, concepts, visions, perspectives, values, beliefs, truths but leaves them free to write it down in their own words. And thus the written word is not a dictation from God but a document written by humans with human brains and with the limitations of human understanding and human memory. Thus the truths necessary for salvation are therein contained, yet there are places where Bible writers disagree on matters that are not relevant. I’m sure you know many of these. Likewise, prophets may have a vision, but not really understand it all or at all. Paul, understood that prior to the second coming there was a special work that Christ would do. Paul also, unequivocally, emphatically stated that they were living in the “last days” and the second coming was emanate. Now what does this mean. We have several choices. Paul was wrong about the last days therefore Paul was not inspired and we should discount everything he ever wrote – scripture cannot be trusted. A rather illogical and unreasonable response. We could also respond by realizing that God did NOT reveal to Paul when the second coming would occur and Paul, thinking the gospel was about to go to the entire (known) world, assumed (with his own human brain without divine revelation) that they were in the end of time. And therefore, realizing Christ’s special work to occur before the second coming put Christ immediately in the MH place in His heavenly ministry.

Regarding EGW, the real key to understanding EGW’s ministry is to read widely in her writings. This is the same key to understanding the Bible. People who read a little here and a little there can come up with all sorts of beliefs, the challenge is to take everything written and bring it all together. If you want to understand the investigative judgment correctly you must read EGW much more widely. She speaks of Christ in his heavenly ministry as directing all the agencies in heaven for our good. As doing His grand work of instruction. The passages in GC are only one small part of her beliefs about this and can only be rightly understood by comparing it with Scripture and the rest of her writings. The theology you reject is a distortion of the truth promoted by those who read her narrowly. So I don’t disagree that she wrote those words and some have taken those words very narrowly and concretely and built theologies around them that actually deny the overall truth that EGW wrote about, but just because some have misused EGW in this way does not mean she is unreliable.

Now again, what difference does it make any way, the final message of mercy to the world is not about EGW it is about God and His character of love as revealed by Jesus. To the degree that people use the Bible or EGW to misrepresent this truth then we all should use whatever means God gives us to reveal the truth about God and reject distorted views.

Tim
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Stan Ermshar onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 11:47 AM PDT
11" And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12But when Christ[b] had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, 13waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. 14For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. " (Hebrews 10:11-14 (ESV)

Tim,
I don't know what could be any clearer than that text above. That is clear that the atonement was finished once for all, and Christ "sat down" and all he is waiting for is for the final consummation of all things.

If a prophetess comes along 1800 years later and directly contradicts what is so clear, then, on what basis are you saying that Ellen White is also inspired?

The late Raymond Cottrell, who was as good an SDA scholar as there was, he edited the SDA Bible commentary, was convinced that there was no Biblical evidence to support the sanctuary doctrine, and towards the end of his life wrote this:

"It has been repeatedly and consistently demonstrated that an ordained minister may believe that Christ was a created being (and not God in the full sense of the word), or that a person can earn salvation by faithfully observing the Ten Commandments, or that Genesis 1 is not a literal account of creation a mere six thousand years ago – without being disciplined and forfeiting his ministerial credentials. But it has also been repeatedly and consistently demonstrated that an ordained minister may not conscientiously question the authenticity of the traditional interpretation of Daniel 8:14, even in his thoughts, without his ministerial credentials being revoked. As noted below, in several instances as much as half a century of faithful service to the church has not been sufficient to mitigate this result."

This doctrine is an albatross around the neck of the SDA church, and any amount of revisionist history will not change that fact.

Stan



1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Tim onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 12:17 PM PDT
Stan,

First I hope you saw my post immediately before yours as some of your concerns were addressed there.

You stated, speaking of Hebrews, “That is clear that the atonement was finished once and for all…”

Here is the real crux of the issue – what is the Atonement? If you see that the atonement was Christ shedding his blood to appease the wrath of the Father then it was finished, if you see the atonement was Christ shedding his blood to pay some penalty for sin so sinners could be legally pardoned or forgiven then it was finished. But if you realize atonement is actually At-One-ment, being reconciled back into unity with God, as Paul says in 2 Corinthians 5 being changed from enemies into friends with God (Good News Translation), then you realize Christ’s death provided what was absolutely necessary to bring this restored unity about, but at the cross all were not then restored to unity with God. So Christ continues to minister in the sanctuary – (the sanctuary of the human soul) by directing all the agencies of heaven (including the Holy Spirit – remember Christ’s own words that the HS would only teach what He was given from Christ to speak) from the sanctuary in heaven to bring all things back into unity and oneness.

Please recall Eph 1:9, 10 “And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, 10 to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment--to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ.”

Notice, this unity, this oneness this At-one-ment did not happen when Christ died on the cross, according to Paul, but will happen “when times reach their fulfillment.” So he make it clear, an additional work was to be done to minister what Christ accomplished at the cross. A useful metaphor, is that at the Cross Christ defeated the infection of sin and procured a remedy, now He is directing all the agencies of heaven in distributing the remedy and all who take it are reconciled or at-one-ed with Christ. EGW was right on target and in complete harmony with Scripture. Those who teach all was done at the cross are the ones who reject Scripture and the reality of their own life experience and are exactly as EGW stated, living in Darkness. If such a message were to go forward, that no true remedy exists, no real unity with God in heart and mind is to be experienced here and now, because it was completely accomplished at the cross, then certainly darkness would be the result.

So I will ask you what I asked early, what has made you so angry and why do you have such a need to attack EGW?

Tim
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Greg onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 02:40 PM PDT
Tim,

Can I ask you a question? If I repent from my sins and put my faith in Jesus Christ today, can I know with certainty that I am saved?

Greg
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Stan Ermshar onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 03:54 PM PDT
Tim,

Why do you perceive that I am angry? It seems like whenever facts and actual Bible verses are presented, then you perceive that to be anger. The sad facts of history of all the honest, sincere Christians who have been thrown out of the SDA church because they disagree does paint a disgusting picture. I came to Christ, and was born again while I was listening to Desmond Ford present the true gospel. Forensic justification is taught in the Bible, and has been the predominant view of most of the geat saints of the faith.

I would like to quote again from the late great Raymond Cottrell from his last article published before he died:

"The historicist principle by which Adventists have consistently understood and interpreted Bible prophecy has, ever since the beginning, imposed our uninspired modern perspective of salvation history on it, and thereby been in unwitting violation of the sola Scriptura principle. In contrast, the historical principle honors the Bible's own perspective of salvation history, within which its prophetic messages were given and to which they were intended to apply. It thereby consistently honors the sola Scriptura principle. Let us not soon forget that the historicist interpretation of Bible prophecy has ever been and continues to be responsible for the loss of many otherwise dedicated leaders and the defection of uncounted hundreds of otherwise faithful Seventh-day Adventists. It has, in addition, diverted considerable time, attention, and substantial resources of the church from its mission to the world.

Surely it is high time for responsible church leaders to awake to the situation and do something about it. The obscurantist 1600-page, 5-volume Daniel and Revelation Committee report on Daniel accepts and consistently applies the historicist principle to Bible prophecy---officially for the church. Do we want the twenty-first century to witness the fulfillment of Christ's promise to return, or do we prefer to repeat our pathetic historicist past complacently and indefinitely into the future, and thereby alienate the respect and confidence of biblically literate Adventists and non-Adventists? "

See, this is the issue. It is credibility. Any doctrine has to be built on solid Biblical exegesis, and not pre-conceived ideas, or an anxiety for the church to somehow revise its actual history, and try to make the doctrine of the Investigative Judgment anything other than what it is--a doctrine that is antithetical to the gospel as this doctrine is described in "Great Controversy." All assurance of salvation and joy in living the Christian life is lost, when you have to try to remember all your unconfessed sins, and fear being lost. This creates guilt and a stunted Christian growth.

I praise God that the sin question has been settled once for all. Jesus paid it all on Calvary, and now to him I owe my life.

Soli Deo Gloria (To God alone be the glory),

Stan


1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Tim onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 05:08 PM PDT
Stan,

It is obvious that you are not happy with EGW or the SDA church, your anger comes across in your attacks against her and her organization. Denial doesn't change that reality. So, given your clear statements of disagreement with EGW and your belief the SDA church is wrong for its teaching about salvation, why are you here on this site? What is your agenda? I have not seen a desire to grow and learn. For instance, I quoted clear scripture passages about the atonement describing from the Bible a reality that diverges from your preconcieved ideas and you chose not to discuss it. I respect your freedom to do so but why stay on this site unless it is merely to throw out slanderous allegations and inflammatory accusations against EGW and the SDA church. I don't find this helpful.

So, if you find comfort in the fact the Jesus paid a price and "it is all" taken care of, then rejoice in your already recieved perfection and unity with God and pity those of us who are still longing for the full healing and restoration that we believe Christ is actively working to accomplish. As Paul has said let every person be fully pursuaded in their own mind and I percieve you are so settled into your position that no amount of evidence, truth or reasoning will dislodge you from it. So blessings to you and may you find the all the joy and happiness God longs to bestow. But I would ask that you cease and desist comments designed to attack and malign and instead share the truth about God as revealed in Jesus and what He means to you.

Tim
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Tim onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 05:13 PM PDT
Greg,

Jesus said, "This is life eternal, that they might know you the only true God and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." John 17:3 If you know God, intimately connected with Him then you can have assurance.

But Jesus also said that false Christs will go out into the world and Paul said false gospels are preached so when you say if you repent and put your faith in Jesus can you have assurance - only if it is the true Jesus. There are many who will be lost thinking all along they have repented and put their faith in Jesus.

Jesus said, "They will come to me in that day and say, 'Lord, Lord, we have prophecied in YOUR name, cast out demons in YOUR name, and performed miracles in YOUR name. But I will say get away you workers of iniquity, I never KNEW you."

So I can't answer your question because I don't know whether you know God and Jesus Christ whom he has sent.

Tim
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Greg onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 06:21 PM PDT
Tim,

Assume I am in the camp who knows the true gospel and the true Jesus. If I repent of my sins and put my faith in the true Jesus today, can I know with certainty that I am saved?

Greg
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Stan Ermshar onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 08:37 PM PDT
Tim,

I appreciate your comments and your participation in this dialogue. I am sorry if you have perceived me as being angry. It is possible that I didn't make the quotation marks clear when I was quoting Raymond Cottrell, the former editor of the SDA Bible commentary. He was also a former missionary of the SDA church. (My grandfather Leo B. Halliwell was also an SDA missionary for 27 years on the Amazon River.) But when a scholar of Raymond Cottrell's stature, makes some pointed comments about the exegetical problems that exist with 1844 and the sanctuary, then I think we need to pay attention.

Now, remember that Cottrell died as a loyal member of the SDA church. Is it disloyal or inflammatory to even question the basis of the sanctuary doctrine?

The comments you made above, Tim, reflects a spirit that is troubling. I guess I thought this was a fairly liberal SDA website. But it looks like the spirit of liberalism stops when challenges are made to Ellen White's authority, and the foundational doctrine of the SDA church.

Stan
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: lynric onMonday, July 03 2006 @ 11:01 PM PDT
Tim, I wanted to comment on your mention of Ephesians 1:9-10 to show that
Jesus hasn't completed his work in heaven yet. Verse 10 says that when times
will have reached their fulfillment, he will bring all things in heaven and earth
together under one head, Jesus Christ.

This verse does not suggest that Jesus did not finish his work of reconiliation
and unity at the cross. It merely points to the fact that, as Romans 8:20-23
state, all creation is waiting with groaning for the sons of God to be revealed so
creation itself can be freed from its bondage to decay. This final freedom comes
with the return of Jesus and the establishment of the new heaven and earth.

But this final restoration is not waiting for Jesus to finish his work in the most
holy place. Jesus work of reconiliation was finished on the cross: "For it was the
Father's good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to
reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His
cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in
heaven." (Colossians 1:19-20).

And again in verses 21-22, "And although you were formerly alienated and
hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds, yet he has now reconciled you in His
fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and
blamelss and beyond reproach—"

Further, Jesus made us alive with Him and cancelled all our transgressions,
"having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us,
which were hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to
the cross." (Col. 2:13-14).

Further, Paul continues by explaining that Jesus disarmed the rulers and
authorities and made a public display of them, triumphing over them by
Himself. And then verse 3:1 says, "Therefore if you have been raised up with
Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand
of God."

Jesus has totally finished the work of reconciliation, and he has sat down at the
right hand of God. He made peace not just by a decision but through His blood
shed on the cross. This peace was not only between mankind and Himself
(Jesus Himself is God), but also between Jews and Gentiles. Only the blood of
Jesus could accomplish this peace, this reconciliation.

God is, indeed, a good God. But His goodness far exceeds our own ability to
understand or define goodness. God's goodness included sacrificing Himself in
order to save eternally a lost and sinful race.

There was a question about God's character before Jesus came—but it was not a
question of His "right" to punish and destroy sin and sinful people. Romans
3:22-26 explains that the question was why He had not destroyed them long
before: "God presented him [Jesus] as a sacrifice of atonmenet, through faith in
his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance had
had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished—he did it to demonstrate
his justice at the presenttimne, so as to be just and the one who justifies those
who have faith in Jesus."

Jesus exonerated God's character at the cross. He showed why he had left
mankind's sin unpunished for milennia—because He had always planned to
come and die for them. He demonstrated His own responsibility for his sinful
creations by taking into himself the curse of the law (Gal 3:13) and became sin
for us (2 Cor. 5:21). All this was complete at the cross: God was vindicated, the
power of sin was broken, the curse of the law was destroyed, and with the
resurrection the power of death was also broken.

All creation has always known God is sovereign, and God is just. His power and
divine nature have always been revealed in what has been made (Romasn
1:18-20). The blood of Jesus at the cross showed God's mercy and grace.
Without justice, grace is empty. God is eternally just, and He is eternally
gracious. All this was revealed at the cross.

Praise Him!

Lynric
1844 and the Investigative Judgment
Authored by: Tim onTuesday, July 04 2006 @ 05:28 AM PDT
Stan,

Thank you for reaffirming my point. If you reread your last comment you will notice that you did not attempt in any fashion to deal with the perspectives of the investigative judgment which I presented using Bible texts above, but instead chose to redirect your attacks against this website and make new allegations against us. If you want to engage in honest dialogue about these issues you are welcome, and welcome to discuss a divergent position, but if your agenda is merely to malign and attack then I must say, for me personally, such an attitude is not welcome.

But, I am going to make the assumption that my conclusions about you have been simple misunderstandings and that you are a genuine seeker of truth who wants to engage in honest dialogue. With that assumptions the following is a comprehensive explanation of the sanctuary doctrine supported with Biblcal and EGW quotes. Now I challenge you to discuss this substantively and show me my earlier concerns about your need to attack were unfounded.


In the book Evangelism Ellen White said, “In every school established the most simple theory of theology should be taught.” (p.223). When you think of the sanctuary message, the sanctuary doctrine, the theology of the sanctuary, does a simple theory come to mind? Or is it complex? Mysterious? Or even confusing? Our goal with this article is to make this often complex topic, simple, reasonable and easily understandable. We will break this discussion into three sections: Sections I will be an historic overview of this doctrine, Section II we will build on our history and in Section III we will put all pieces together for a cohesive integrated whole.

Section I Historic Overview:

The foundation of the SDA sanctuary doctrine arises out of the disappointment of 1844 when the Millerites wrongly considered the earth was the sanctuary to be cleansed in Daniel 8:14. In the aftermath of this disappointment a small group of dedicated Bible students prayerfully reexamined the Biblical evidence and discovered that the earth is not the sanctuary. They discovered the Bible teaches about a sanctuary not made by human hands, a sanctuary in which Christ ministers as High Priest, a “heavenly sanctuary” in which Christ is ministering. This led to the development of the doctrine of the “Investigative Judgment” in which the sins of the people that had been recorded there are brought into review, cases are examined and names are kept or names are removed. All cases of professed followers of God are reviewed and God’s handling of the situation reveals His justice and justifies Him in how He solves the sin problem. When all the cases are adequately reviewed and decided this time period culminates with the second coming of Christ.

As you review this historic perspective do any questions come to your mind? As I was studying this topic several questions came to my mind: Why does the Heavenly Sanctuary need cleansing, and from what? By what means is it cleansed, and who cleanses it? Is this cleansing related to judgment? If so, who is being judged? Why does it take so long? Who needs the investigation? Who is being investigated? And what relevance does any of this have for me here on earth?

Section II Building on History:

Why do we need to build on history? Why can’t we just accept what the founders of the church have laid down and stick with that? Well, one of the founders, Ellen G. White said in 1900, long after the foundational understanding was laid:

“The significance of the Jewish economy is not yet fully comprehended. Truths vast and profound are shadowed forth in its rites and symbols. The gospel is the key that unlocks its mysteries. Through a knowledge of the plan of redemption, its truths are opened to the understanding. Far more than we do, it is our privilege to understand these wonderful themes.” COL 133.

I’d like to take her at her word and far more than we do understand these wonderful themes.

As a physician one of the first principles we are taught is to diagnose because if the diagnosis is wrong, most of the time, the treatment will be wrong. So we need to start with some diagnostic questions: 1. What sanctuary needed cleansing? 2. What is the problem with the sanctuary that it needs cleansing? And then after answering these two questions we can answer 3. How is the sanctuary cleansed?

What sanctuary needs cleansing? Our founders have established that the sanctuary in heaven needs cleansing, but, is that the only sanctuary the Bible teaches that needs cleansing? Paul tells us of another sanctuary that needs cleansing, “Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you? If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy him; for God's temple is sacred, and you are that temple.” (1 Corinthians 3:16,17). Do you and I need cleansing? Is this part of the sanctuary message? If so how?

“In the building of the sanctuary as a dwelling place for God, Moses was directed to make all things according to the pattern of things in the heavens. God called him into the mount, and revealed to him the heavenly things, and in their similitude the tabernacle, with all that pertained to it, was fashioned.
“So to Israel, whom He desired to make His dwelling place, He revealed His glorious ideal of character. The pattern was shown them in the mount when the law was given from Sinai and when God passed by before Moses and proclaimed, "The Lord, The Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth." Exodus 34:6. ..
“Through Christ was to be fulfilled the purpose of which the tabernacle was a symbol--that glorious building, its walls of glistening gold reflecting in rainbow hues the curtains inwrought with cherubim, the fragrance of ever-burning incense pervading all, the priests robed in spotless white, and in the deep mystery of the inner place, above the mercy seat, between the figures of the bowed, worshiping angels, the glory of the Holiest. In all, God desired His people to read His purpose for the human soul. It was the same purpose long afterward set forth by the apostle Paul, speaking by the Holy Spirit:
"Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are." 1 Corinthians 3:16, 17. (Education 34-36).

“In the cleansing of the temple, Jesus was announcing His mission as the Messiah, and entering upon His work. That temple, erected for the abode of the divine Presence, was designed to be an object lesson for Israel and for the world. From eternal ages it was God's purpose that every created being, from the bright and holy seraph to man, should be a temple for the indwelling of the Creator. Because of sin, humanity ceased to be a temple for God. Darkened and defiled by evil, the heart of man no longer revealed the glory of the Divine One. But by the incarnation of the Son of God, the purpose of Heaven is fulfilled. God dwells in humanity, and through saving grace the heart of man becomes again His temple. God designed that the temple at Jerusalem should be a continual witness to the high destiny open to every soul. But the Jews had not understood the significance of the building they regarded with so much pride. They did not yield themselves as holy temples for the Divine Spirit. The courts of the temple at Jerusalem, filled with the tumult of unholy traffic, represented all too truly the temple of the heart, defiled by the presence of sensual passion and unholy thoughts. In cleansing the temple from the world's buyers and sellers, Jesus announced His mission to cleanse the heart from the defilement of sin,--from the earthly desires, the selfish lusts, the evil habits, that corrupt the soul. "The Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple, even the Messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, He shall come, saith the Lord of hosts. But who may abide the day of His coming? and who shall stand when He appeareth? for He is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap: and He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver." Mal. 3:1-3. (DA 161).

So what sanctuary needs cleansing? The sanctuary in heaven and the sanctuary of the human soul! Both need cleansing! Then what do they need cleansing from?

Let’s start with the heavenly sanctuary, what defiles the heavenly sanctuary? “From the opening of the great controversy it has been Satan's purpose to misrepresent God's character and to excite rebellion against His law, and this work appears to be crowned with success.” (PP 338). Satan, the angel formerly known as Lucifer, occupied the position of covering cherub. Where did the covering cherub stand? Where was his place in heaven? In the Most Holy Place in the sanctuary in heaven. Before man ever sinned, before man even existed, Lucifer sinned in the sanctuary in heaven misrepresenting God’s character. The first defilement of the sanctuary in heaven was not your sin and my sin it was Lucifer’s sin, his lies about God, his misrepresentations about the character of God, which started right in the heavenly throne room.

“Satan had accused God of requiring self-denial of the angels, when he knew nothing of what it meant himself, and when he would not himself make any self-sacrifice for others. This was the accusation that Satan made against God in heaven; and after the evil one was expelled from heaven, he continually charged the Lord with exacting service which he would not render himself. Christ came to the world to meet these false accusations, and to reveal the Father.” (RH, February 18, 1890).

“God was represented as severe, exacting, revengeful, and arbitrary. He was pictured as one who could take pleasure in the sufferings of his creatures. The very attributes that belonged to the character of Satan, the evil one represented as belonging to the character of God.” (Signs of the Times January 20, 1890).

So, from what does the sanctuary need cleansing? The heavenly sanctuary, first, needs to be cleansed from Satan’s lies about God, that God is selfish, unwilling to serve, that He is severe, exacting, revengeful and arbitrary. And secondly, as our founders have established, the heavenly sanctuary needs to be cleansed from the recorded sins of the people.

But what about the sanctuary of the human soul, from what does it need cleansing? “Eve believed the words of Satan, and the belief of that falsehood in regard to God's character, changed the condition and character of both herself and husband. They were changed from good and obedient children into transgressors...” (RH, January 5, 1886 par. 8). What was the first thing that defiled the sanctuary of the human soul? Lies about God! It was not what we call sin, the passions, lusts, earthliness – Oh, no! The first thing to contaminate the Spirit Temple was lies about God. The exact same thing that contaminated the Heavenly Sanctuary! It was only after the Spirit Temple was contaminated with lies about God that it was further defiled with passions, the selfish lusts, earthly desires and evil habits, but only after the mind was already contaminated with lies about God.

So from what does the sanctuary need cleansing? The heavenly sanctuary needs cleansing from the lies that Satan told about God and the recorded sins of the people. And the Spirit Temple, the sanctuary of the human soul, needs cleansing from the lies that Satan told about God and defilement of sin, the earthly desires, the selfish lusts, the evil habits. Both sanctuaries need cleansing from the exact same things!

Now how is the prophecy of Daniel 8 related to the cleansing of these two sanctuaries? In this chapter there is a little horn power described as defiling the sanctuary, but the little horn power is not the ultimate enemy of God. He is just one of the many faces God’s true enemy uses. Let’s look at the power behind the little horn?

Daniel states the little horn grew great, but “not by its own power.” So where does the little horn get his power? Revelation 13:2 tells us the power comes from the dragon. The little horn threw the starry host down and trampled them, yet Revelation tells us the dragon’s tail swept 1/3 of the stars out of heaven (Revelation 12:3). The little horn power sets itself up against the prince and the dragon fought against Michael the Prince (Revelation 12:7). The little horn power takes away the daily sacrifice, (the daily sacrifice is just a metaphorical way of saying God’s entire plan to heal and restore from sin). God’s plan of salvation was taken away. The dragon creates a false system, a system that supplants God’s plan (Mark 4:15, 2Cor 11:14, 2Thes 2:9). The dragon’s false plan does not result in healing and restoration but is a plan that degrades the human being. The little horn power brought the place of his sanctuary low. Instead of having a plan that heals and restores the mind, the false system defiles and damages the soul sanctuary and brings it low. The dragon establishes the synagogue of Satan (Rev 2:9, 3:9) a false sanctuary, a spirit temple filled by the Satanic spirit. The little horn power throws truth to the ground and causes deceit and the dragon is the father of lies (John 8:44). The little horn power persecutes the saints and the dragon persecutes the saints (Rev 12:13-17). Every defining feature of the little horn power is true of the dragon. And who is the dragon, the true enemy of God? That ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan (Rev 12:9). The true enemy of God is Satan and the little horn power is merely one of his agents and Satan uses many agents.

Where does the little horn get his power? From the dragon! But now the question is: what is the dragon’s power? “Since the children have flesh and blood, he [Christ] too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death--that is, the devil” Hebrews 2:14. Did you know that the devil holds the power of death? What is the power of death? And how can the devil hold it? Christ gives us the insight we need in John 17:3 “Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.”

What is eternal life? Knowing God! If eternal life is knowing God, then what would eternal death be? Not knowing God! Then what would Satan’s power be? The lies that he tells about God, that we believe, that keep us from knowing God! What was the first thing that contaminated the heavenly sanctuary? Lies about God! What was the first thing that contaminated the sanctuary of the human soul? Lies about God!

So what defiles the soul temple? The lies about God that Adam and Eve believed that broke their trust and confidence and relationship with God; the continued lies that we believe that prevent us from trusting God and being reconciled to Him. If those persistent lies about God are not removed by the truth about God that Jesus Christ has brought, then Satan’s principles of selfishness continue to grow – the earthly desires, the selfish lusts, the evil habits. These destructive elements strengthen within and instead of Christlike character developing we develop the character of the rebel, the Satanic character; and the soul, the individual created with dignity, nobility of character, in God’s image to represent Him to an onlooking universe, the being designed to be the dwelling place of the Holy Spirit instead of revealing Godlike character becomes a synagogue of Satan and the habitation of devils and reveals the Satanic character, ultimately ending in desolation and destruction. The abomination that causes desolation is the abominations of lies about God, told by Satan in heaven and religious systems on earth, that results in the desolation of the image of God in man, the destruction of character and ultimately the desolation of the sanctuary – the sanctuary of the human soul.

We have identified the two sanctuaries, the sanctuary in heaven and the sanctuary of the human soul. Both were defiled by lies about God. Both defiled by the sins of the people, either the actual sin in the Spirit Temple or the recorded sin in the Heavenly Temple. We have identified what has been contaminated and what it is that contaminates, now we must explore what it is that cleanses.

What cleanses the sanctuary? What cleanses the sanctuary in heaven and the sanctuary of the human soul? And of course we all know this answer, we have been taught this since cradle-roll – “The blood of Jesus” cleanses. But what does that mean? How does the blood of Jesus cleanse? Jesus said, “"I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.” (John 6:53-55). We know that Jesus was not promoting cannibalism, so His words must mean something else, what does it mean to drink His blood and eat His flesh?

“In the study of the Bible the converted soul eats the flesh and drinks the blood of the Son of God, which He himself interprets as the receiving and doing of His words, that are spirit and life.” (Fundamentals of Christian Education 378). Could the flesh and blood of Christ have something to do with truth? Could truth have something to do with cleansing the sanctuary? “The leaven of truth works a change in the whole man, making the coarse refined, the rough gentle, the selfish generous. By it [the truth] the impure are cleansed, washed in the blood of the Lamb.” (Christ’s Object Lessons 102). Could it really be that the truth and the blood of the Lamb are the same, that the blood of the Lamb is simply a metaphorical way of saying the truth? Is it the truth that cleanses? The truth about what? The truth about God Himself as revealed in the life of Christ. As Christ Himself said, “you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” John 8:32

Section III Putting it all Together

In the book The Great Controversy Ellen White states, “The coming of Christ as our high priest to the most holy place, for the cleansing of the sanctuary, brought to view in Daniel 8:14; the coming of the Son of man to the Ancient of Days, as presented in Daniel 7:13; and the coming of the Lord to His temple, foretold by Malachi[3:1-3], are descriptions of the same event; and this is also represented by the coming of the bridegroom to the marriage, described by Christ in the parable of the ten virgins, of Matthew 25.” (p. 426). Notice we have four texts that describe the same event. Let’s look at the first three.

Daniel 8:14 “Unto 2300 days and then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” If you look in your SDA Bible commentary you will discover that the Hebrew word translated cleansed is more accurately translated justified. Unto 2300 days and then shall the sanctuary be justified.

But what does justified mean? To set right, to put in order, to put what is out of line back in line. For those of you who have a word processor on your computer there is a command at the top which allows you to justify your margins. If you justify the margins what happens? Everything that is out of line is put in line, everything that is out of order is put in order, everything that is out of harmony is put in harmony, everything that is wrong is set right. Now the question is: what needs justifying? What is wrong that needs to be set right? What is out of line that needs to be put in line? What is out of order that needs reordering? What is out of harmony that needs to be brought back into harmony? The mind, heart and character of mankind! Let’s see if the evidence supports this.

Remember in the quote above four texts are all referring to the same event. We have just examined Daniel 8:14, but look at the Malachi 3:1-3 which is describing the same event, “…The Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple…behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts. But who can endure the day of his coming? Who can stand when he appears? For he will be like a refiner's fire or a launderer's soap. He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver; he will purify the Levites and refine them like gold and silver.” What does a refiner’s fire and launderer’s soap do? They cleanse! Remember Daniel 8:14 unto 2300 days and then the sanctuary will be cleansed or justified or set right. And what does Malachi say He cleanses when He comes to His temple? The Levites! Wait a minute now, Malachi must have made a mistake. He couldn’t actually be talking about cleansing the people, not that. Surely, Malachi must have meant a building or record books in heaven, but not people, right? No, I think Malachi got it right. “He will purify the Levites and refine them like gold and silver.”

Well who are the Levites? “You also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.” (1Pet 2:4) What is another name for a “spiritual house”? A sanctuary! “You also, like living stones, are being built into a sanctuary…” And just a few verses down Peter repeats this reality for emphasis, “But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood…” (1Pet 2:9).

2300 days then shall the sanctuary be justified or set right, 2300 days and He shall come to His temple and He shall purify or cleanse the Levites – the priesthood of believers, the sanctuary of the human soul. How does the cleansing of the Spirit Temple, the sanctuary of the human soul affect the sanctuary in heaven? How are the two sanctuaries related in this cleansing? Well there was another text referring to the same event, the Daniel 7 text. “The Ancient of Days took his seat…The court was seated, and the books were opened.” (Daniel 7:9,10).

Whose books were opened? In the investigative judgment, when the books are opened and the investigation is going on, whose books are opened? I am an alumnus from Southern Adventist University. At the University they still have records of my transcripts, the classes I attended, the payments I made, the loans and grants I received and how those funds were allocated. If SAU opens its books for examination who is being examined, me, or SAU? I am a member of Collegedale SDA church and regularly give donations of various kinds. The church keeps meticulous records of the funds received and how they are allocated. If Collegedale church opens its books for outside examination, who is being examined the contributors or the church? Enron had tens of thousands of customers and accounts. They received millions of dollars and when their books were opened for examination who was being examined, Enron or the customers, the customers or Enron?

In heaven, when God opens the books, who is being examined, God or us? Whose books are these? Have we kept these books or has God kept these books? These books are God’s books. Why would God need to open His books and why would God need to open His books about us?

Imagine I present myself to your community and claim I have a cure for cancer and have cured 50 people of cancer. I tell you they are all cancer free. I even present 50 people and ask your medical experts to examine them to see if they can find any cancer and sure enough, not one has cancer. Would you now believe I have a cure for cancer if all were cancer free? How would you know if they ever had cancer to start with? Conversely, if instead I bring out some medical records that document the presence of cancer, and then, as you review the records you see where a treatment was given and the record indicates the cancer is cured. But, I won’t let you examine any patients, would you believe I have a cure for cancer?

Why is this analogy relevant? Because after Satan’s original lies about God, which led others into sin, he had some new lies that needed to be dealt with as well.

“Many [angels] were disposed to heed this counsel, to repent of their disaffection, and seek to be again received into favor with the Father and His Son. But Lucifer had another deception ready. The mighty revolter now declared that the angels who had united with him had gone too far to return; that he was acquainted with the divine law, and knew that God would not forgive… PP 41
“So far as Satan himself was concerned, it was true that he had now gone too far to return. But not so with those who had been blinded by his deceptions. To them the counsel and entreaties of the loyal angels opened a door of hope; and had they heeded the warning, they might have broken away from the snare of Satan.” PP 41

So, not only was there the original lies about God, but when some of the angels who sided with Satan were warned and were considering returning to loyalty to God, Satan hit them with a new set of lies. Satan says, “Oh, no! God won’t forgive. You can’t return once you’ve chosen to rebel against God.” Satan wouldn’t try to hit humans with this same lie would he? He wouldn’t lie about God’s ability to heal, about God’s ability to restore would he?

“In the opening of the great controversy, Satan had declared that the law of God could not be obeyed, that justice was inconsistent with mercy, and that, should the law be broken, it would be impossible for the sinner to be pardoned. Every sin must meet its punishment, urged Satan; and if God should remit the punishment of sin, He would not be a God of truth and justice. When men broke the law of God, and defied His will, Satan exulted. It was proved, he declared, that the law could not be obeyed; man could not be forgiven. Because he, after his rebellion, had been banished from heaven, Satan claimed that the human race must be forever shut out from God's favor. God could not be just, he urged, and yet show mercy to the sinner. (DA 761).

Have you ever heard some well meaning Christian teachers or preachers telling you that every sin must be punished? That if God were to remit the punishment that He would not be just? That justice requires God to punish sin? These are Satan’s arguments! These are Satan’s lies! How can God cleanse the Spirit Temple if we don’t get rid of the lies about Him that are in our minds? If we still have these ideas operating in our mind then we still have work to do to cleanse the Spirit Temple from the lies of Satan.

What were the new lies? Once a sinner always a sinner; God would not forgive; It is impossible to be healed and restored; Sin must be punished; God is unjust if He forgives and heals; Humans are no better in character than Satan and deserve the same fate. These are the new lies of Satan that came along after we fell into sin. So, how does God handle these lies? Jesus Christ! Jesus Christ is the answer to all of these lies, the initial lies were answered by His life and death and resurrection and the second set of lies are answered by His work in the sanctuary. And to help us understand the work of Christ, God gave a little mini-theater, a little drama set, in which this was all acted out for us to see and understand. It is called the sanctuary service. And in Zechariah we are privileged to have the Day of Atonement highlighted to help us understand how God handles Satan’s lies.

“Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right side to accuse him.” The angel of the Lord represents Christ and Satan is there to accuse. Who is the accuser? Satan! Who do we get defended from? Do we get defended from God? Is Christ up in heaven pleading to His Father to be merciful? No! He protects us from Satan! He protects us from Satan’s lies. Satan says, “Joshua is a sinner. You’re not fair to take Joshua back. He sinned like me. He is not better than I am. If you forgive and take Joshua back you are not just. He deserves to be punished. You can’t be just if you don’t punish him for his sin!” And how does the Lord respond?

“The LORD said to Satan, ‘The LORD rebuke you, Satan! The LORD, who has chosen Jerusalem, rebuke you! Is not this man a burning stick snatched from the fire?’“ Notice the Lord doesn’t say, “Is not this man a stick near the fire about to be burned.” No, he’s a burning stick. He is a stick in the fire on fire. Sin is already infecting him. He is already being damaged, consumed and destroyed by sin. He is on fire with sin. The fire of sin is destroying our character. We are on fire with it. And the Lord by His grace reaches down into this fire. He came into the fire Himself. He was burned by this fire in order to pull you and me out and put the fire of sin out in our hearts and minds! But when He puts the fire of sin out, we are still scarred, still damaged, still scorched, still soot ridden. We’re still contaminated by what the fire of sin did to us. And now we need cleansing and restoring. And so the Lord says:

“Now Joshua was dressed in filthy [soot ridden contaminated] clothes [the fire of sin had damaged him] as he stood before the angel. The angel said to those who were standing before him, ‘Take off his filthy clothes.’ Then he said to Joshua, ‘See, I have taken away your sin, and I will put rich garments on you.’” What do the filthy clothes represent? Sinful character! Damaged, bent, twisted, scarred character! In this time, this special period of history, this Day of Atonement time, when Satan is standing and accusing, God is saying, “I want to take away your defective and damaged character and restore in you my character!” Right now, today, God wants to heal you and me! In this post 1844 period it is a time for cleansing from sin, for the restoration of the image of God within, to have new garments of Christlike character.

“Listen, O high priest Joshua and your associates seated before you, who are men symbolic of things to come:” Symbolic of God’s plan to cleanse His sanctuary, God’s plan to heal and restore you and me!

“This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time, declares the Lord.” After what time? Could it be the longest time prophecy in the Bible, the longest time prophecy in the Bible that has to do with the cleansing of the sanctuary? “I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts.” The law is a transcript of God’s character. I will put my character in their hearts and minds. I will clothe them with rich clothing. It all means the same thing, the recreation of Christlike character within. The Spirit Temple being cleansed! “I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, `Know the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest.” (Hebrews 8:10,11). “This is life eternal that they might know you the only true God and Jesus Christ whom you have sent (John 17:3). The lies of Satan have been blown away. They are no longer operating in the mind. We are back in unity with God. We are back in unity with Christ. We are back in oneness – at-one-ment! The day of at-one-ment, the day of recreation of Christlike character within!

Imagine you have a child who has metastatic cancer, cancer all over their body. The doctors have told you the case is terminal; there is nothing that can be done. But you have heard of a doctor out west that no matter what disease the person has that goes to him, they always leave wit