Biblical Evidence for the Investigative Judgment

[phkrause]

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

....It is high time that we place the Bible above the writings of Ellen White. On one occasion, Ellen said the following: If the testimonies do not teach according to the Bible, reject them.

She didn't mean that we should only reject parts of her writings. She was saying that if we find that her writings contradict God's Word, the Bible, we should reject her writings-- i.e., her entire prophetic ministry. This is made clear in the first 45 pages of 1 Selected Messages. She has very plain things to say about those who selectively use her writings only to support their favorite themes or ideas. That is like only using some parts of the Bible while rejecting other parts. Ellen White also said that was wrong to do, but yet many continue to do it. Either Ellen White was a genuine prophet of God or she wasn't.

Absolutely agree

[John317]

....obstacles to the date of 1844 itself:

3) At the end of the 2300 days the cleansing is completed or finished. If Jesus went into the most holy in 1844 the cleansing was just beginning and still not finished today.

Are you saying you believe that the text signifies the heavenly sanctuary would be cleansed completely by the end of the 2300 days and would not be a process of cleansing?

What do you believe the "cleansing" consists of? In other words, what is the Bible talking about when it speaks of the heavenly sanctuary being cleansed? An analysis of this will help us answer the question of why the cleansing has not yet been completed after 160 years.

Originally Posted By: cheddar

The book of Daniel is sealed until the time of the end. It says right in Dan. 8 that the vision of the 2300 days is for the time of the end. We haven't come to that time yet.

What is "the time of the end"? How do you know that we have not yet come to "the time of the end"?

[John317]

....The judgment is supposedly taking place an no one even knows about it. On the ancient day of atonement every single Israelite knew the judgment was coming, there was nothing done in secret. The antitype affects not only the people of God but the whole world.

The Bible speaks of judgments that were going on while people were totally unaware of it. For instance, the people before the Flood didn't know they were being judged, and neither did the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, although all of these people had an opportunity to know, yet they rejected the knowledge and refused to change. So the idea that people don't know they are being judged in a "silent judgment" is not a problem biblically.

If the Investigative Judgment is not known on earth, it isn't God's fault. He has revealed it to millions of people, who have been given the assignment of telling their neighbors and broadcasting it to the whole world. There will be many who perish because people rejected the assignment of telling their neighbors about the Christ and about the IJ.

[John317]

The question is better phrased "What WILL HAPPEN at the end of the 2300 days prophecy?" This is because the vision is directly related with the taking away of the 'daily' and is yet to occur in the near future shortly before the 2nd Coming.

Explain this. What is the "daily"? And what do you expect to happen?

[John317]

Daniel knew nothing of the Sanctuary in heaven. His concern was the earthly sanctuary in Jerusalem and the future of his own Jewish race. The setting is not heaven but rather the earth where the pollution was taking place. If the pollution was taking place on earth, the cleaning must take place there as well.

Since when is God's revelation limited by man's concerns? But if David and Moses knew of and wrote about the heavenly sanctuary, we can be sure that Daniel must have had some knowledge of it as well. In fact, Daniel's description of the heavenly court scene in Daniel 7: 9-14 prove that Daniel had to be aware of the existence of a heavenly sanctuary. Yet even if we assume that Daniel knew nothing of the heavenly sanctuary, that does not keep God from inspiring Daniel to write about the heavenly sanctuary. Prophets did not always understand what God was showing them in vision, and Daniel is a good example of that. Daniel says plainly that he did not understand all of the visions that God was showing him. They weren't intended for Daniel. Some of Daniel's visions were intended for people living long after Daniel's time. That's why much of the book of Daniel, especially the part having to do with time, was sealed.

Notice that in Daniel 9: 2, the prophet was very concerned about the 70 years spoken of by Jeremiah about the exile. It seems clear that Daniel believed the 2300 evening-mornings meant that the sanctuary in Jerusalem would be in a state of desolation for an incredibly long time. In view of Jeremiah's prophecy, however, Daniel had expected the Jews would be returning fairly soon to Jerusalem and that the sanctuary there would be restored. Then comes the prophecy of the 2300 days. It seems obvious that Daniel understood the 2300 days to be years, because if 2300 days were literal days, it wouldn't have been very long to wait. Yet in chapter 9, we find the prophet on his knees reminding God of His promises to Jeremiah that the exile would last only 70 years. Then Gabriel returns, this time to instruct Daniel regarding the time element of the vision. He's told that his people have been given 490 years of probationary time in which to accept God's Messiah. That period is cut off from the longer period of time given in Daniel 8: 14. We know this to be true because the angel says the 2300 evening-mornings relate to "many days in the future," or to "the time of the end," and therefore it could not possibly be literal days-- for that would only amount to about 6 years.

Daniel did not know that there would be no sanctuary in Jerusalem at the end of the 2300 evening-mornings. In other words, the prophet had no way of knowing that in 70 AD, the earthly sanctuary would be destroyed by the Roman armies, leaving the sanctuary in heaven the only sanctuary that could possibly be referred to in Daniel 8: 14.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

This has been litigated many times on this forum. Every single time it has been shown that there is absolutely no Biblical evidence for the SDA Church .org's "investigated judgment".

Instead of merely telling us your conclusions and denying that there's biblical evidence for the IJ, deal forthrightly with the evidence presented. Show that it doesn't say what is being claimed it says.

Saying "there's no evidence" or "there's no IJ" is about as helpful as merely saying "there's lots of evidence" or "there is an IJ."

The first premise that you and the SDA Church .org make is the "year/day principle". No such "principle" exists in Scripture. There are only two instances in which a "day for a year" or a "year for a day" exists. These are found in Numbers chapter fourteen and Ezekiel chapter four. In both these case it is clearly stated that this "year/day" thing is to be used only for these specific instances.

Nowhere in these two Biblical Texts is it stated that such an application is to be used for all "prophetic" interpretations.

Since you thus have no "year/day" then all your interpretations thereafter are not true. Thus, because you falsely apply the "year/day" in order to get your Sanctuary/Investigative Judgment/1844 theory these doctrines are not Biblical in any way shape or form.

I think that is "forthright" and "direct" enough to show that you have no case whatsoever for the Sanctuary/Investigative Judgment/1844.

There is no Biblical evidence anywhere in any form whatsoever for and Investigative Judgement. You cannot give my friend John317 what does not exist. Since Biblical evidence for the Investigative Judgement does not exist you are thus not able to cite any evidence for its existence.

[miz3]

She didn't mean that we should only reject parts of her writings. She was saying that if we find that her writings contradict God's Word, the Bible, we should reject her writings-- i.e., her entire prophetic ministry. This is made clear in the first 45 pages of 1 Selected Messages. She has very plain things to say about those who selectively use her writings only to support their favorite themes or ideas. That is like only using some parts of the Bible while rejecting other parts. Ellen White also said that was wrong to do, but yet many continue to do it. Either Ellen White was a genuine prophet of God or she wasn't.

Well John317 here is a blatant instance where Ellen White contradicted the Bible.

"God cannot take to heaven the slave who has been kept in ignorance and degradation, knowing nothing of God or the Bible, fearing nothing but his master's lash, and holding a lower position than the brutes.... He does the best thing for him that a compassionate God can do. He permits him to be as if he had not been,...." (Early Writings, p.276)

This statement is in direct contradiction to the Words of the Bible and the Bible only.

John chapter one says that Jesus Christ is the "light that lights" every human. This by itself makes Ellen White's words above wrong and in contradiction to the Bible.

The Bible in addition says that "nothing is impossible" with God. And those texts in context were talking about Salvation and who could and could not be saved.

So the Bible and Ellen White are in contradiction to each other in this case.

Even the degradation of slavery cannot keep God from saving such poor sinners and some will be in the Kingdom of Heaven according to the Bible Principles that God can and does do the impossible.

So God can save babies, even babies, who die in the womb. Nothing is impossible with God.

[cheddar]

So what about the feast of trumpets and feast of tabernacles?

If you’re going to say that 1844 is the fulfillment of the day of atonement then you have to show where the other feasts were fulfilled as well.

Paul said that the holy days or feasts are a shadow of things to come.

The spring feasts were all fulfilled within the lifetime of one man – Jesus Christ. The feast of weeks came after at Pentecost so I doubt the fall feasts would be spread out over thousands of years.

I think you will agree that the trumpets of Rev. are the antitype of the feast of trumpets so I want to know how all seven were fulfilled prior to 1844 when the trumpets don’t even begin until the 144K are sealed. (Rev. 7).

Were the 144K sealed before 1844?

[Dr. Rich]

Originally Posted By: John317

What "sanctuary doctrine" do you agree with? Do you mean the "investigative judgment"? When do you believe it happened?

I agree with the fall feasts from the OT. The spring feasts pointed forward to the 1st coming so we should see the fall feasts fulfilled prior to the 2nd coming. If you want to say that the day of atonement was fulfilled in 1844 that’s fine, but show where the feast of trumpets happened prior and the feast of tabernacles happened after. The trumpets of Rev. occur during the lifetime of the 144K.

There are also three main obstacles to the date of 1844 itself:

1) The day for a year principle. A principle is a rule or law or something that holds true in every case. There are time periods in Dan. and Rev. which are clearly literal so this is not a valid principle. The three weeks that Daniel fasted, the twenty days that Gabriel fought with the prince of Persia and the millennium of Rev. are all literal.

2) No start date is ever given for the 2300 days. If you use the start date for the seventy weeks and say that it is ‘cut off’ from the 2300 days that’s all fine and good unless the seventy weeks are cut off at the end which would still leave no start date. If something is ‘cut off’ from something else it’s usually cut off at the end anyway.

3) At the end of the 2300 days the cleansing is completed or finished. If Jesus went into the most holy in 1844 the cleansing was just beginning and still not finished today. The book of Daniel is sealed until the ‘time of the end’. It says right in Dan. 8 that the vision of the 2300 days is for the ‘time of the end’. We haven’t come to that time yet.

great points Cheddar. However I believe the last generation is now living so the time of the end is at hand and NEW information about what Daniel's sealed up prophecies and also the entire book of Revelation should be an is now being revealed. Problem is, none of the wicked will evey understand (dan. 12:10)

[BobRyan]

So what about the feast of trumpets and feast of tabernacles?

If you’re going to say that 1844 is the fulfillment of the day of atonement then you have to show where the other feasts were fulfilled as well.

Paul said that the holy days or feasts are a shadow of things to come.

The feast of Trumpets is a ten day precursor to the Day of Atonement - which we know as in 1844.

What is still future now is the feast of booths, (time of trouble) and the jubilee rest of the land (Millennium). All of which happen once the Day of Atonement process ends.

in Christ,

Bob

[Lysimachus]

Originally Posted By: cheddar

So what about the feast of trumpets and feast of tabernacles?

If you’re going to say that 1844 is the fulfillment of the day of atonement then you have to show where the other feasts were fulfilled as well.

Paul said that the holy days or feasts are a shadow of things to come.

The feast of Trumpets is a ten day precursor to the Day of Atonement - which we know as in 1844.

What is still future now is the feast of booths, (time of trouble) and the jubilee rest of the land (Millennium). All of which happen once the Day of Atonement process ends.

in Christ,

Bob

Amen. So simple and so plain, isn't it.

[Nic Samojluk]

John317 Wrote:

“None of that means that what Ellen White wrote is false. The same can be said about Paul and Luke and all of the prophets of God, including Moses-- none of them were infallible, either.”

And your answer implies that the angel was wrong in his interpretation of the prophecy found in Daniel 8. Why do we need to ask Ellen White about the meaning of this prediction if the Lord sent his angel with the explanation? Is what Ellen wrote superior in content to that of the angel? When was the last time you read the entire chapter of Daniel 8 without jumping out of its context? What is the action described there? Is there any reference there to the Temple in heaven?

The context is the battle between Alexander the Great and Medo-Persia. Isn’t it? The sanctuary is desolated and later deconsecrated. When was the sanctuary in heaven desolated and later reconsecrated? My question to you is: Why go elsewhere to look for the starting point for the vision, where it is right there in the same chapter: the Battle of Granicus between Alexander the Great and Medo-Persia in 334 BC.

If you add 2300 prophetic years and allow for the lack of a zero year between BC and AD you arrive at 1967, the Six Day War between Israel and the Arabs, which established the right of modern Israel to exist. This is evidence that God did not forget the Jewish race to which the Prophet Daniel belonged. Daniel was greatly concerned about the future of his people—not about Adventists—and the Lord provided the answer he was seeking.

The Lord took the Jewish people and brought them back to the promised land one more time. Read the prophecy found in Ezekiel 37 where we find a decryption of an incredible miracle in the valley of the dry bones. Evidently God still loves the Jews, in spite of what they did to the Son of God. They have something to say about the sacredness of the Sabbath, which is a symbol of our allegiance to the Creator.

[Nic Samojluk]

John317 Wrote:

"Seventy weeks are determined [or "cut off"] for your people..."

Did any of the Bible translators choose the “cut off” option for Daniel 9:24? I counted four translators using the term “decreed,” four the word “determined,” one of them chose the word “shortened,” and another the term “apportioned.”

As you can see, the “cut off” phrase is not very popular among biblical experts. We Adventists like it because it fits with our preconceived ideas and our strange love for a doctrine which none else in the history of biblical studies has adopted nor considered. Don’t’ forget that the IJ doctrine was born in a corn field.

[Nic Samojluk]

Excellent point, pk. I'm sure we've all seen discussions where both sides quote Ellen White, but then suddenly one side says that they only want to hear what the Bible says. We do base our beliefs on the Bible but knowing what Ellen White wrote on a subject is also very important. Knowing Scripture doesn't preclude knowing and accepting Ellen White's prophetic ministry. We need to undertand what she said on the IJ.

Let us not forget that she merely borrowed such an explanation from another source. Copying what others have written has its shortcomings and dangers, especially when the borrowing is not acknowledgd and even denied. The end should not justify the means!

[Nic Samojluk]

She didn't mean that we should only reject parts of her writings. She was saying that if we find that her writings contradict God's Word, the Bible, we should reject her writings-- i.e., her entire prophetic ministry. This is made clear in the first 45 pages of 1 Selected Messages. She has very plain things to say about those who selectively use her writings only to support their favorite themes or ideas. That is like only using some parts of the Bible while rejecting other parts. Ellen White also said that was wrong to do, but yet many continue to do it. Either Ellen White was a genuine prophet of God or she wasn't.

Do you accept everything we find in the Bible? The Bible tells me both that God hardened the hart of Pharaoh and that it was Pharaoh who hardened his heart. Do you accept both statements as factually true?

The Bible states both that God incited King David to count Israel and that it was Satan who moved him to carry out his military census. Do you accept both statements as factually true?

Paul wrote that God is sovereign and therefore he had the right to harden the heart of Pharaoh. Do you accept his reasoning as correct? Does this idea square with God’s character as described in the rest of Scripture?

We find in the Psalms a statement saying that those who dash the little ones against the rocks are blessed. This contradicts what Jesus said about loving our enemies. Do you think that David was right when he wrote that?

Did not Ellen White tell us that there is much to be learned from our study of the Scriptures? Did not she encourage us to study the Bible instead of constantly relying of what she had written?

[Nic Samojluk]

John317 wrote:

“Daniel did not know that there would be no sanctuary in Jerusalem at the end of the 2300 evening-mornings. In other words, the prophet had no way of knowing that in 70 AD, the earthly sanctuary would be destroyed by the Roman armies, leaving the sanctuary in heaven the only sanctuary that could possibly be referred to in Daniel 8: 14.”

Daniel did not know, but God did know this. This is evident from verse 11 of said chapter: “the place of his sanctuary was brought low.” When General Titus destroyed the Temple in 70 AD, the Holy Temple was brought to the very foundation of the structure. Was that low enough?

[cheddar]

First, if you can show me where you read this, “Paul said that the holy days or feasts are a shadow of things to come”, one could begin to take you seriously. Well, if you could quote me from Paul this single word, “feasts”, I’ll pay more attention to your honest intentions.

The main days of each feast like the passover and day of atonement were called 'holy convocations' or holy days.

I added the word feasts but it doesn't change the meaning any.

And yes, I know that Christ is the fulfillment of all the feasts and the sanctuary service - what's your point?

The spring feasts were all fulfilled in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ but the fall feasts have not been fulfilled yet.

So that blows a hole in your theory that everything was finished at the cross.

[John317]

Excellent point, pk. I'm sure we've all seen discussions where both sides quote Ellen White, but then suddenly one side says that they only want to hear what the Bible says. We do base our beliefs on the Bible but knowing what Ellen White wrote on a subject is also very important. Knowing Scripture doesn't preclude knowing and accepting Ellen White's prophetic ministry. We need to undertand what she said on the IJ.

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

Let us not forget that she merely borrowed such an explanation from another source. Copying what others have written has its shortcomings and dangers, especially when the borrowing is not acknowledgd and even denied. The end should not justify the means!

Ellen White NEVER MERELY BORROWED anything. A comparison of her writings with the writings of people that she "copied" shows that she sometimes used other people's writings in order to express what God had shown her. She was very selective in the use of other people's writings. She wouldn't use the parts that conflicted with the message that God wanted her to convey. Also, Ellen White changed the significance of the original writing so that it conformed to her own intentions.

What you say does not take into account the fact that some of the writers she "borrowed" from also borrowed from other writings.

Your objections on this point have been answered very well many times before. In order to fully answer them again here, it would take us completely off topic. Let's stay on topic and deal with the Bible evidence presented in the first two posts of the thread.

[Dr. Rich]

Originally Posted By: Seventh Day

First, if you can show me where you read this, “Paul said that the holy days or feasts are a shadow of things to come”, one could begin to take you seriously. Well, if you could quote me from Paul this single word, “feasts”, I’ll pay more attention to your honest intentions.

The main days of each feast like the passover and day of atonement were called 'holy convocations' or holy days.

I added the word feasts but it doesn't change the meaning any.

And yes, I know that Christ is the fulfillment of all the feasts and the sanctuary service - what's your point?

The spring feasts were all fulfilled in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ but the fall feasts have not been fulfilled yet.

So that blows a hole in your theory that everything was finished at the cross.

Very true Cheddar.

[John317]

The first premise that you and the SDA Church .org make is the "year/day principle". No such "principle" exists in Scripture. There are only two instances in which a "day for a year" or a "year for a day" exists. These are found in Numbers chapter fourteen and Ezekiel chapter four. In both these case it is clearly stated that this "year/day" thing is to be used only for these specific instances.

Nowhere in these two Biblical Texts is it stated that such an application is to be used for all "prophetic" interpretations.

Since you thus have no "year/day" then all your interpretations thereafter are not true.

Your conclusion that there is no year-day principle contained in the Bible is false. There is actually very good evidence to show that it exists in Scripture. We will examine the evidence. Let's begin the examination by first looking closely at one particular verse: Daniel 7: 25.

Daniel 7:25-- ".... and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time."

What is "a time and times and the dividing of time"?

[John317]

Let The Truth Jesus Christ set you free!

Why, I have discovered a thousand times I was wrong!

Why, a thousand times has God showed me the right way!

Why, must one always be right before one once can be right?

Why, will it be sin to admit mistake, or sin not to admit mistake?

Why not deal with the topic--- i.e., the first two posts on the thread?

[John317]

Daniel did not know that there would be no sanctuary in Jerusalem at the end of the 2300 evening-mornings. In other words, the prophet had no way of knowing that in 70 AD, the earthly sanctuary would be destroyed by the Roman armies, leaving the sanctuary in heaven the only sanctuary that could possibly be referred to in Daniel 8: 14.

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

Daniel did not know, but God did know this. This is evident from verse 11 of said chapter: the place of his sanctuary was brought low. When General Titus destroyed the Temple in 70 AD, the Holy Temple was brought to the very foundation of the structure. Was that low enough?

That's exactly my point-- that God's revelations are not limited by the prophet's concerns or knowledge. You stated earlier that Daniel was concerned about the sanctuary in Jerusalem, not the heavenly sanctuary; but Daniel's personal concern about Jerusalem does not mean the prophecy must be describing the cleansing of the the earthly temple rather than the one in heaven.

So, yes, of course God knew the sanctuary on earth would be destroyed in 70 AD. That's why the sanctuary to be cleansed was the heavenly sanctuary and not the one in Jerusalem. [Hebrews 9: 23 speaks of the need for the heavenly to be purified, or cleansed.] The sanctuary in Jerusalem had no more validity in God's eyes after the death of Christ. Hebrews 8 and 9 talk about the sanctuary that God was primarily concerned with, and it was the one where Christ is our High Priest.

[John317]

There is no Biblical evidence anywhere in any form whatsoever for and Investigative Judgement. .... Since Biblical evidence for the Investigative Judgement does not exist you are thus not able to cite any evidence for its existence.

Instead of prematurely jumping to your conclusion before you even deal directly with the evidence, you need to try and show that the evidence presented in the first two posts is false. If the Bible evidence for the IJ does not exist at all, it should be easy to show this to be the case.

[John317]

I am getting too old for all this confusion ...

You Seventh-day Adventists will do better if, before you say one word of an IJ, will first find out about the Omnipotent and All-knowing and Omnipresent and All-Wise and Just God who from before the foundation = creation of man or the world, knew everyone by name and character and word and deed every moment of his life.

Then see how much more will be said about an IJ.

Your post here shows that you are the one who's confused. This objection to the IJ does not have anything to do with what SDAs say about the Investigative Judgment. We don't believe or teach that the IJ is for the purpose of God learning anything. God is all-knowing, as you rightly point out. We've said this over and over again. It is an important part of our Fundamental Beliefs. So, of course God knows who is going to be saved. Your post demonstrates that you have apparently not even gone to the trouble of studying to make sure you understand what you're rejecting. What do SDAs say are the purposes of the IJ? We'll get to a discussion of those purposes as we go along in this study. However, if you study the first two posts of the thread, you will find some answers to the question.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

Do you accept everything we find in the Bible?

I accept the whole Bible as God's inspired Word.

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

The Bible tells me both that God hardened the hart of Pharaoh and that it was Pharaoh who hardened his heart. Do you accept both statements as factually true?

If properly understood, both statements are true. But you are again taking the discussion off topic. The discussion is about the Bible evidence for the IJ as presented in the first two posts of the thread. Your questions here have to do with whether we can believe all of the Bible or whether Ellen White's writings are dependable or inspired. Answering those kinds of questions would require a different thread.

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

Did not Ellen White tell us that there is much to be learned from our study of the Scriptures? Did not she encourage us to study the Bible instead of constantly relying of what she had written?

[/quote']

Of course. But she wasn't saying that we shouldn't study her own writings. Nor was she saying her writings are false or shouldn't be believed. On the contrary, Ellen G. White said all SDA families should have her books in their homes and be reading them. The truth is, we need both the Bible and the Spirit of prophecy. There's no reason we can't study and know both sources of authority.

But let's please get back on topic: the Investigative Judgment.