Sanctuary

[tall73]

Now, let's put it more directly.

Do you try to say that Jesus must have multiple sacrifices at different times because the earthly type pictured that?

No. You don't make the earthly dictate to the heavenly in this case. Jesus' once for all sacrifice fulfilled them all and is BETTER than the type.

So why not accept the NT description of these events when it interprets the type? He made a once for all entry into the sanctuary.

And He made purification for sins, and cleansed the heavenly things.

The earthly was the shadow. The heavenly, described in the NT, is the true.

Heb 10:1 For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near.

[cheddar]

You didn’t address the feast of trumpets or the feast of tabernacles. These are just as much a part of the final judgment as the judgment itself.

If Jesus went directly to the most holy after his ascension there was no warning and we’ve been in the wilderness for 2000 years?

The spring feasts had a literal fulfillment at the 1st coming of Jesus (Pentecost was after) so the fall feasts will have a literal fulfillment just prior to the 2nd coming of Jesus.

[John317]

Christ's glory did not appear when He was upon this earth. He was then a Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. Men hid their faces from Him. But He was following the path God had marked out for Him. Still bearing humanity, He ascended to heaven, triumphant and victorious. He has taken the blood of the atonement into the holiest of all, sprinkled it upon the mercy-seat and His own garments, and blessed the people. Soon He will appear the second time to declare that there is no more sacrifice for sin. {ST April 19, 1905, par. 4}

When do you see these events happening?

I am still waiting for someone to take this on.

This has been an important quote historically in the debate. I have some notions of what it could mean. Perhaps some of you do as well.

The last sentence in the quote refers to the end of human probation and the second coming of Christ, at which time there will be no more forgiveness of sins. Christ will not remain our Advocate forever.

This agrees with Hebrews 9: 28 and Rev. 22: 11, 12:--

Hebrews 9:28

.... unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

NOTE: When Christ returns, He won't be coming to deal with sin. That work must be done BEFORE He comes.

Rev. 22:11-12

He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still. [12] And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

[Lysimachus]

tall73,

Are you suggesting that Ellen White is saying that Jesus entered the Holy of Holies upon His ascension and sprinkled the blood on the Mercy Seat?

I doubt she is stressing chronology here, but simply expressing the significance of what Jesus is doing. Hardly could she mean Jesus did this at His ascension, as that would contradict what she has said everywhere else.

[tall73]

You didn’t address the feast of trumpets or the feast of tabernacles. These are just as much a part of the final judgment as the judgment itself.

If Jesus went directly to the most holy after his ascension there was no warning and we’ve been in the wilderness for 2000 years?

The spring feasts had a literal fulfillment at the 1st coming of Jesus (Pentecost was after) so the fall feasts will have a literal fulfillment just prior to the 2nd coming of Jesus.

Actually as I said that the other aspects of the Day of Atonement will likely occur as scheduled it does not throw off your other elements.

But the text of Hebrews still describes the portion in the sanctuary in Day of Atonement language and says the purification was made.

[tall73]

Originally Posted By: tall73

Christ's glory did not appear when He was upon this earth. He was then a Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. Men hid their faces from Him. But He was following the path God had marked out for Him. Still bearing humanity, He ascended to heaven, triumphant and victorious. He has taken the blood of the atonement into the holiest of all, sprinkled it upon the mercy-seat and His own garments, and blessed the people. Soon He will appear the second time to declare that there is no more sacrifice for sin. {ST April 19, 1905, par. 4}

When do you see these events happening?

I am still waiting for someone to take this on.

This has been an important quote historically in the debate. I have some notions of what it could mean. Perhaps some of you do as well.

The last sentence in the quote refers to the end of human probation and the second coming of Christ, at which time there will be no more forgiveness of sins. Christ will not remain our Advocate forever.

This agrees with Hebrews 9: 28 and Rev. 22: 11, 12:--

Hebrews 9:28

.... unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

NOTE: When Christ returns, He won't be coming to deal with sin. That work must be done BEFORE He comes.

Alright, we agree the last sentence deals with His coming to bring salvation and that by that time sin dealing with will be over.

How about the first part.

[tall73]

tall73,

Are you suggesting that Ellen White is saying that Jesus entered the Holy of Holies upon His ascension and sprinkled the blood on the Mercy Seat?

I doubt she is stressing chronology here, but simply expressing the significance of what Jesus is doing. Hardly could she mean Jesus did this at His ascension, as that would contradict what she has said everywhere else.

Well therein is the rub. She could be saying that, and some Adventists have historically argued that in the form of the inauguration view.

Notice a few elements.

Christ’s glory did not appear when He was upon this earth. He was then a Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. Men hid their faces from Him. But He was following the path God had marked out for Him.

Ok, we all agree this is during His first advent I assume.

Still bearing humanity, He ascended to heaven, triumphant and victorious.

This is Christ's ascension.

He has taken the blood of the atonement into the holiest of all, sprinkled it upon the mercy-seat and His own garments, and blessed the people. Soon He will appear the second time to declare that there is no more sacrifice for sin. {ST April 19, 1905, par. 4}

Here we see a shift in time, looking back.

But the two things sprinkled indicate inauguration/dedication rites. The sprinkling of the garments was part of the priestly dedication. While the furniture was also sprinkled in the inauguration.

Now the reason I mentioned this is sometimes Adventists do not think He went into the MHP at His ascension. Others do. This comment seems to indicate He did.

I originally asked Sky because she more than some of the others seemed to be worried about compartments.

This quote was used by Andross in "A More Excellent Ministry" after the Ballenger crisis to address some of the compartment arguments Ballenger raised. It was a way to allow for Jesus to enter the MHP without having to do anything related to the Day of Atonement.

This was a bit new to some because this quote was not well known and the arguments previously centered around what compartment Jesus was in rather than just what ministry role He was fulfilling.

For instance:

Sabbath, March 24th, 1849, we had a sweet, and very interesting meeting with the Brethren at Topsham, Me. The Holy Ghost was poured out upon us, and I was taken off in the Spirit to the City of the living God. There I was shown that the commandments of God, and the testimony of Jesus Christ, relating to the shut door, could not be separated, and that the time for the commandments of God to shine out, with all their importance, and for God's people to be tried on the Sabbath truth, was when the door was opened in the Most Holy Place of the Heavenly Sanctuary, where the Ark is, containing the ten commandments. This door was not opened, until the mediation of Jesus was finished in the Holy Place of the Sanctuary in 1844. Then, Jesus rose up, and shut the door in the Holy Place, and opened the door in the Most Holy, and passed within the second vail, where he now stands by the Ark; and where the faith of Israel now reaches. {RH, August 1, 1849 par. 2}

Notice also the view of Hiram Edson:

“Heaven seemed open to my view, and I saw distinctly and clearly, that instead of our High Priest coming out of the Most Holy of the heavenly sanctuary to come to this earth on the tenth day of the seventh month, at the end of the 2300 days, that he for the first time entered on that day the second apartment of that sanctuary; and that he had a work to perform in the Most Holy before coming to this earth.

However, Andross took the inauguration view which is now probably the dominant view among scholars. Some historics still do not appreciate this view.

So I was trying to see what Sky, etc. thought.

[tall73]

Over time the Adventist apologetics on the sanctuary have shifted. For instance now Richard Davidson says that he believes Jesus probably went into the MHP right away, and focuses more on type of ministry.

But at one time that view was less common.

In an extreme example there is an Adventist pastor Marc Rasell who I have discussed with on several internet forums who has mentioned before that he sees both a "Christological" and "end time" fulfillment, because Hebrews indicates Day of Atonement language and actions, but he still sees it again applying to 1844.

There are a lot of Adventist views out there, partly as a result of trying to deal with the Hebrews material.

Johnsson and Davidson, and more recent Adventist scholar Felix Cortez for instance all acknowledge Day of Atonement references in Hebrews 9:25, because the language compels them to. But they all try to find different ways to explain why it doesn't mean Day of Atonement actions.

They agree on their goal--that it can't be Day of Atonement actions--but have different ways to try to get there.

[ClubV12]

I don't have a problem with that quote. I see Sister White writing from the perspective of one who just lived through 1844. Present time for her, Jesus entering the Most Holy Place. The timeline makes perfect sense viewed in that perspective. He came to earth, died, entered the Holy Place, 1844 entered the Most Holy Place. A simple tracing of the timeline from when He first came to the present day, her day, our day.

[tall73]

Below are some quotations from Adventist sources that recognize day of atonement references in Hebrews, and especially Hebrews 9:25.

Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary on Hebrews 10:1:

Compare ch. 9:25, 26, where the work of Christ is again contrasted with that of the earthly high priest on the Day of Atonement.

M.L. Andreasen in The Book of Hebrews:

On Hebrews 4:16

Verse 16. "The throne of grace." This expression in Christian terminology has always been closely connected with prayer, and hence with the mercy seat. It was at the mercy seat the high priest supplicated

God for forgiveness on the Day of Atonement. We are invited to come there to find grace to help in time of need. (64)

On Hebrews 9:25-26

Verses 25, 26. The priests entered the first apartment daily, the high priest once every year when he went into the most holy with the blood of the bullock and the goat. (127)

William Johnsson in his essay "Day of Atonement Allusions," which can be found in the DARCOM volume on Hebrews, lists 9:25 as clearly alluding to the Day of Atonement.

The context clearly points to a Day of Atonement allusion (high priest . . . yearly . . . blood [cf. 9:7]) (113)

Alwyn Salom in his appendix article in the Daniel and Revelation committee series, speaking of verse 24, 25:

The reference in the context of the Day of Atonement service of the earthly high priest is not to the outer compartment of the sanctuary. (227)

Richard Davidson, notes that vs. 25 is an unmistakable reference to the Day of Atonement:

I agree with Young that Hebrews 9:7 and 9:25 refer to Day of Atonement, because of the clear references to “once a year” and “every year” respectively. ("Inauguration or Day of Atonement?" Andrews University Seminary Studies, Spring 2002, 79)

Felix Cortez states in his article "From the Holy to the Most Holy Place: The Period of Hebrews 9:6-10 and the Day of Atonement as a Metaphor of Transition" in the Journal of Biblical Literature, 125.3, Fall 2006, 527 (footnote):

Unchallenged references to the Day of Atonement in the central section include 9:7, 25

[tall73]

I don't have a problem with that quote. I see Sister White writing from the perspective of one who just lived through 1844. Present time for her, Jesus entering the Most Holy Place. The timeline makes perfect sense viewed in that perspective. He came to earth, died, entered the Holy Place, 1844 entered the Most Holy Place. A simple tracing of the timeline from when He first came to the present day, her day, our day.

I am not saying you would have a problem with it either way.

However, do you think the Day of Atonement involved sprinkling the high priest's GARMENTS?

That is the priestly dedication, which why this likely refers to His initial ascension and activity in the sanctuary.

[John317]

....Christ's glory did not appear when He was upon this earth. He was then a Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. Men hid their faces from Him. But He was following the path God had marked out for Him. Still bearing humanity, He ascended to heaven, triumphant and victorious. He has taken the blood of the atonement into the holiest of all, sprinkled it upon the mercy-seat and His own garments, and blessed the people. Soon He will appear the second time to declare that there is no more sacrifice for sin. {ST April 19, 1905, par. 4}

....Alright, we agree the last sentence deals with His coming to bring salvation and that by that time sin dealing with will be over.

How about the first part.

That part is dealing with the fact that after Christ's ascension, He dedicated, or inaugurated, the heavenly sanctuary, just as Moses inaugurated the earthly in Lev 8. We see this in Hebrews 9: 12.

Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

After the dedication, Jesus blessed the people by sending them the Holy Spirit. See Acts 3: 21, 26; cf. Lev. 9: 22-24.

Check out Lev. 8: 30, which describes the blood being sprinkled on the clothes of the priests.

[John317]

... He came to earth, died, entered the Holy Place, 1844 entered the Most Holy Place.

Exactly. Jesus' entrance into the Most Holy Place soon after His ascension was for the purpose of consecrating, or inaugurating, the heavenly sanctuary, preparatory to His mediatorial work there. God the Father anointed Jesus just as Moses had anointed Aaron.

That entrance into the Most Holy Place in 31 AD doesn't at all preclude His entrance into the Most Holy Place in 1844. His entrance in 1844 was for the purpose of beginning the last phase of His work, which is a work of investigation, or judgment, the typical Day of Atonement.

The previous entrance was in order to dedicate the entire sanctuary for His work as High Priest.

This is in complete harmony with what the Bible teaches.

By the way, contrary to the way it's often understood and communicated, the entrance of Christ into the Most Holy Place in Oct of 1844 is wonderful, wonderful news!! It means that Christ is at the door, almost ready to come for His Church. It means "GET READY, GET READY! Let the Holy Spirit cleanse your soul temple."

[tall73]

Originally Posted By: ClubV12

... He came to earth, died, entered the Holy Place, 1844 entered the Most Holy Place.

That entrance into the Most Holy Place in 31 AD doesn't at all preclude His entrance into the Most Holy Place in 1844. His entrance in 1844 was for the purpose of beginning the last phase of His work, which is a work of investigation, or judgment, the typical Day of Atonement.

Heb 9:23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

Heb 9:24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.

Heb 9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own

How do you interpret the Day of Atonement references in 9:25 that even Adventist scholars acknowledge?

Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary on Hebrews 10:1:

Compare ch. 9:25, 26, where the work of Christ is again contrasted with that of the earthly high priest on the Day of Atonement.

M.L. Andreasen in The Book of Hebrews:

On Hebrews 4:16

Verse 16. "The throne of grace." This expression in Christian terminology has always been closely connected with prayer, and hence with the mercy seat. It was at the mercy seat the high priest supplicated

God for forgiveness on the Day of Atonement. We are invited to come there to find grace to help in time of need. (64)

On Hebrews 9:25-26

Verses 25, 26. The priests entered the first apartment daily, the high priest once every year when he went into the most holy with the blood of the bullock and the goat. (127)

William Johnsson in his essay "Day of Atonement Allusions," which can be found in the DARCOM volume on Hebrews, lists 9:25 as clearly alluding to the Day of Atonement.

The context clearly points to a Day of Atonement allusion (high priest . . . yearly . . . blood [cf. 9:7]) (113)

Alwyn Salom in his appendix article in the Daniel and Revelation committee series, speaking of verse 24, 25:

The reference in the context of the Day of Atonement service of the earthly high priest is not to the outer compartment of the sanctuary. (227)

Richard Davidson, notes that vs. 25 is an unmistakable reference to the Day of Atonement:

I agree with Young that Hebrews 9:7 and 9:25 refer to Day of Atonement, because of the clear references to “once a year” and “every year” respectively. ("Inauguration or Day of Atonement?" Andrews University Seminary Studies, Spring 2002, 79)

Felix Cortez states in his article "From the Holy to the Most Holy Place: The Period of Hebrews 9:6-10 and the Day of Atonement as a Metaphor of Transition" in the Journal of Biblical Literature, 125.3, Fall 2006, 527 (footnote):

Unchallenged references to the Day of Atonement in the central section include 9:7, 25

[tall73]

That entrance into the Most Holy Place in 31 AD doesn't at all preclude His entrance into the Most Holy Place in 1844. His entrance in 1844 was for the purpose of beginning the last phase of His work, which is a work of investigation, or judgment, the typical Day of Atonement.

The previous entrance was in order to dedicate the entire sanctuary for His work as High Priest.

This is in complete harmony with what the Bible teaches.

Why does Hebrews indicate that He already made purification for sins in the first century?

Heb 1:3 After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high

[Dr. Rich]

Originally Posted By: ClubV12

I don't have a problem with that quote. I see Sister White writing from the perspective of one who just lived through 1844. Present time for her, Jesus entering the Most Holy Place. The timeline makes perfect sense viewed in that perspective. He came to earth, died, entered the Holy Place, 1844 entered the Most Holy Place. A simple tracing of the timeline from when He first came to the present day, her day, our day.

I am not saying you would have a problem with it either way.

However, do you think the Day of Atonement involved sprinkling the high priest's GARMENTS?

That is the priestly dedication, which why this likely refers to His initial ascension and activity in the sanctuary.

The "problem" can easily be solved by the prophecy found in Dan. 2. The 'stone cut out without hands' MUST first be set up here on this earth as God's last Kingdom of Heaven. Dan. 8:14 merely gives up the time for this to happen since there was NO Kingdom of Heaven on this earth between the sacking of Jeursalem and Oct 22, 1844. Matthew 25:1-13 is proof that the Adventists fit the description of the KOH at that time and right now.

The censor issue, now in heaven shows that Jesus, as our high priest, now has a NEW kingdom of heaven for His 'daily' duty until the censor is cast down to this earth at the start of the last 5 months of this earth's history.

[Lysimachus]

Originally Posted By: Lysimachus

tall73,

Are you suggesting that Ellen White is saying that Jesus entered the Holy of Holies upon His ascension and sprinkled the blood on the Mercy Seat?

I doubt she is stressing chronology here, but simply expressing the significance of what Jesus is doing. Hardly could she mean Jesus did this at His ascension, as that would contradict what she has said everywhere else.

Well therein is the rub. She could be saying that, and some Adventists have historically argued that in the form of the inauguration view.

Notice a few elements.

Christ’s glory did not appear when He was upon this earth. He was then a Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. Men hid their faces from Him. But He was following the path God had marked out for Him.

Ok, we all agree this is during His first advent I assume.

Still bearing humanity, He ascended to heaven, triumphant and victorious.

This is Christ's ascension.

He has taken the blood of the atonement into the holiest of all, sprinkled it upon the mercy-seat and His own garments, and blessed the people. Soon He will appear the second time to declare that there is no more sacrifice for sin. {ST April 19, 1905, par. 4}

Here we see a shift in time, looking back.

But the two things sprinkled indicate inauguration/dedication rites. The sprinkling of the garments was part of the priestly dedication. While the furniture was also sprinkled in the inauguration.

Now the reason I mentioned this is sometimes Adventists do not think He went into the MHP at His ascension. Others do. This comment seems to indicate He did.

I originally asked Sky because she more than some of the others seemed to be worried about compartments.

This quote was used by Andross in "A More Excellent Ministry" after the Ballenger crisis to address some of the compartment arguments Ballenger raised. It was a way to allow for Jesus to enter the MHP without having to do anything related to the Day of Atonement.

This was a bit new to some because this quote was not well known and the arguments previously centered around what compartment Jesus was in rather than just what ministry role He was fulfilling.

For instance:

Sabbath, March 24th, 1849, we had a sweet, and very interesting meeting with the Brethren at Topsham, Me. The Holy Ghost was poured out upon us, and I was taken off in the Spirit to the City of the living God. There I was shown that the commandments of God, and the testimony of Jesus Christ, relating to the shut door, could not be separated, and that the time for the commandments of God to shine out, with all their importance, and for God's people to be tried on the Sabbath truth, was when the door was opened in the Most Holy Place of the Heavenly Sanctuary, where the Ark is, containing the ten commandments. This door was not opened, until the mediation of Jesus was finished in the Holy Place of the Sanctuary in 1844. Then, Jesus rose up, and shut the door in the Holy Place, and opened the door in the Most Holy, and passed within the second vail, where he now stands by the Ark; and where the faith of Israel now reaches. {RH, August 1, 1849 par. 2}

Notice also the view of Hiram Edson:

“Heaven seemed open to my view, and I saw distinctly and clearly, that instead of our High Priest coming out of the Most Holy of the heavenly sanctuary to come to this earth on the tenth day of the seventh month, at the end of the 2300 days, that he for the first time entered on that day the second apartment of that sanctuary; and that he had a work to perform in the Most Holy before coming to this earth.

However, Andross took the inauguration view which is now probably the dominant view among scholars. Some historics still do not appreciate this view.

So I was trying to see what Sky, etc. thought.

I do believe that Christ entered the Holy of Holies upon His ascension for the inauguration. Either way you look at it, it does not destroy the belief that the Antitypical Day of Atonement began in 1844.

Day of Atonement language is splashed about even in the daily services.

[Dr. Rich]

There you go Marcos and ClubV12, the shut door vision was false. Why is it that people continue to use her words when this vision was completely false? Any answers to this?

[ClubV12]

I personally have not taken a position as to when Jesus entered the Most Holy Place or what he did there OTHER THAN the Seventh-day Adventist doctrine that He entered the Most Holy Place in 1844 to begin His work there.

Marcos and John317 raise some interesting points about Jesus dedicating the heavenly sanctuary, as did Moses with Aron, following His ascension. Points I am carefully considering because I value the counsel of my brethren.

One thing I know for SURE, the visions of Ellen White are of the Holy Spirit, there is no fusion on that issue. The only confusion I liken to the same problem I and many others have in the interpretation of scripture, to wit: We don't always understand and interpret correctly that which we read. It is not a problem of the bible or of Ellen Whites work, they stand sure and are accurate in detail. MY problem is being to ignorant to make sense of it. :)

[Dr. Rich]

Are you saying that the vision EGW had on the shut door was of the Holy Spirit? It was not the truth and even those at the GC know that, so what causes you to believe that this vision was from the Holy Spirit?

So you also believe that the visions that Joseph Smith were from the Holy Spirit? If not, what is the difference-as ALL of the Mormons today believe they came from the Holy Spirit?

Jesus clearly said many times as found in the gospel of John, that He was going to go to His Father in heaven. So, how much closer does Jesus have to get to His Father (the Most Holy) in order to do what EGW said? Pleae explain that to me.

[ClubV12]

Dr.Rich asks,

"Are you saying that the vision EGW had on the shut door was of the Holy Spirit?"

Why yes, that is EXACTLY what I'm saying, thanks for asking.

Now WHY don't I believe Joseph Smiths visions were NOT of the Holy Spirit?

Becasue he speaks not according to the law and the testimony, thus the true spirit is revealed.

Dr.Rich says,

"Jesus clearly said many times as found in the gospel of John, that He was going to go to His Father in heaven.... Pleae explain that to me."

Sorry, I won't bother, you will have to figure it out on your own.

[Dr. Rich]

Well, there you go folks, ClubV12 believes only those believers way back in 1884 are saved. Since this vision told her that all of those who did not believe the truth at that time were on the outside of that shut door, I suppose that now includes you too--right? LOL!

[ClubV12]

"Well, there you go folks, ClubV12 believes only those believers way back in 1884 are saved."

Typo alert, 1844, not 1884, I make that same mistake on occasion myself.

Now Dr.Rich you KNOW that is not what I believe. I think you are referring to those folks in 1844 that rejected the sanctuary message. For those folks, the door was shut, their probation ended, they, like the people in Noahs time, were forever lost. They continued to live their lives, go on about their business, knowing not that they were lost (until the rain came and the realized it was to late).

For THEM, at THAT time, it was a test of faith, those that failed were lost, those that believed went on to greater light. It is no different today, each of us individually will have such a test of faith at some point in our walk. We, as a people, as a Church, will also be brought to a test point, wherein many will reject the truth and leave the Church. Ultimately the entire world will face such a test, another "shut door" event if you would.

[wayfinder]

The "shut door" belief was based on Matthew 25:10. Nothing in this verse would indicate that what happened in 1844 or the development of the Sanctuary doctrine, is even close to being true. First the Bridegroom did not come. Second there was not an awakening of the church that the Bridegroom was on His way. Oh there was another correction of the date from 1843 to 1844; which is touted as an awakening. The fact is, the Bridegroom did not come, and still has not come. the door, when shut concludes the formation of the kingdom of the heavens and they then prepare to proclaim the gospel of the kingdom to the world. It is undeniable that the kingdom continues it's slumber and the Bridegroom continues delaying His coming.

[tall73]

I do believe that Christ entered the Holy of Holies upon His ascension for the inauguration. Either way you look at it, it does not destroy the belief that the Antitypical Day of Atonement began in 1844.

Day of Atonement language is splashed about even in the daily services.

So you think it mentions the cleansing of the heavenly things, and then spells out an entry and presentation in God's presence, comparing it to the yearly entry of the high priest with blood, but it means nothing?

And why does Hebrews say the purification for sins was already made?

This is why folks have questioned the doctrine since it was made, both in and outside of the church.