Is the Investigative Judgment in the Bible?

[cheddar]

And that is precisely one of the many reasons the trumpets cannot be future, because the Great Day of Atonement began in 1844. Although principles of those judgments will repeat, and resound, arching to the 7 last plagues.

Hey guys, the math doesn't lie! 2300 begins in 457 and ends in 1844. If you have a problem with the Great Day of Atonement beginning in 1844, you still have to deal with the math, and the math will never give you peace on this matter.

If you don't believe the Day of Atonement has anything to do with 1844, then answer me this:

What happened in 1844 then? Something else? What was significant about the termination of the 2300 years?

I look forward to any alternative explanations of what might have taken place at the terminus of the 2300 years.

(This question does not apply to Nic, as we already know his interpretation)

The book of Daniel is sealed up until the 'time of the end' and the time if the end is when all the bad stuff happens not 1798 (another meaningless historical date).

What better way to seal up the book than to invent a bogus day for a year principle and let all the gullible religious people lap it up like milk. And when the ‘time of the end’ arrives he just says “oh, by the way, all the time periods are literal and the word prophecy means to foretell the future, not the past. Look it up, it’s in the dictionary.”

God has done this before. He let the Jews think that they had to keep the Law for thousands of years and then when Jesus showed up he said “oh, by the way, you don’t have to keep that old law anymore, just believe in me.”

God does let people believe in lies. It’s not a nice fact but it is true. Poor Ellen White, she was so gullible.

[John317]

Gibs, just for clarification, Do you mean to say that between His ascension and 1844, while He was in the Holy Place, Jesus made no atonement for sin, and that the atonement is only a Most Holy Place affair?

I'm not Gibs but the answer is definitely no. The atonement is actually a process that won't be completed until the end of the thousand years when the wicked are destroyed.

[Nic Samojluk]

skyblue888

“Nic, 1967 means nothing except it was a battle between an Arab Gentile and a Jew Gentile. In A.D.34, as a nation, the Jews sealed their rejection of God's mercy and since then it is only individually that they can lay hold on the Gospel of the merits of Christ to find their peace with God. 1967 was not a fulfillment or prophecy in any way, shape, or form.”

Evidently the prophecy found in Ezekiel 37 and what Paul said about the future of God’s chosen nation means nothing to you. Read the dramatic description found in Ezekiel and then consider how this prediction was fulfilled in the rebirth of the nation of Israel. Paul, likewise predicted that the branches which were cut off from the olive tree would be grafted back into the original vine.

”The starting point for the 2,300 day prophecy is 457 B.C.

2,300 years later takes us to the Advent Movement in 1844. It is unimpeachable from a Bible standpoint.”

The starting point is given in chapter 8 of the book of Daniel. We need to be faithful to the context. The correct date is the Battle of Granicus in 334 B. C. with the end point in 1967 when Israel defeated the army of the Arabs in six days.

[Nic Samojluk]

Lysimachus wrote:

“What happened in 1844 then? Something else? What was significant about the termination of the 2300 years?”

If you want to know what happened in 1844 you need to go to Rev. 10: 9-11 instead of the Old Testament. There we are told that those who swallow the little scroll—the book of Daniel—will find that it tastes sweet in their mouth but bitter in their stomach. Bitter is not a synonym of bittersweet!

We Adventists have spent a ton of ink trying to turn what was bitter into a bitter sweet experience. We have been teaching that we were right on the date but wrong only on the event. For me bitter means really bitter—that we were wrong both on the date and on the event.

Our mistake has been to ignore the context found in chapter 8 of Daniel. The starting point for the prophecy is found in said chapter—not elsewhere.

[Nic Samojluk]

skyblue888 asked:

“Gibs, just for clarification, Do you mean to say that between His ascension and 1844, while He was in the Holy Place, Jesus made no atonement for sin, and that the atonement is only a Most Holy Place affair?”

Excellent question! Let me expand it as follows: How about the previous 4,000 years of human existence. No atonement in the Old Testament period? For me, the service in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary represents the OT period and the service in the Most Holy Place the atonement during the New Testament period.

Let’s keep this simple! We have made this issue so complicated nobody can understand it.

[Nic Samojluk]

skyblue888 asked:

“This is what brother Crozier was shown in vision and was confirmed by Mrs. White who was shown by the Lord that Crozier had the true light on the atonement.”

Can you share with us the evidence that the Lord confirmed Ellen White’s understanding of the atonement and her view of what took place in 1844?

Do you believe that every time Mrs. White used the “I was shown” phrase it meant that the Lord showed her this in vision? If this understanding is correct, then why did she borrow from the writing of other people so profusely?

Is it possible that the phrase “I was shown” also meant “I found out by reading the books in my library.” If she relied exclusively on her visions, how do you explain the large collection of books she had?

[Lysimachus]

Lysimachus wrote:

“What happened in 1844 then? Something else? What was significant about the termination of the 2300 years?”

If you want to know what happened in 1844 you need to go to Rev. 10: 9-11 instead of the Old Testament. There we are told that those who swallow the little scroll—the book of Daniel—will find that it tastes sweet in their mouth but bitter in their stomach. Bitter is not a synonym of bittersweet!

We Adventists have spent a ton of ink trying to turn what was bitter into a bitter sweet experience. We have been teaching that we were right on the date but wrong only on the event. For me bitter means really bitter—that we were wrong both on the date and on the event.

Our mistake has been to ignore the context found in chapter 8 of Daniel. The starting point for the prophecy is found in said chapter—not elsewhere.

I already addressed this concern of yours a number of times. Is it truly necessary to repeat the same thing so many times?

[Gibs]

We do have proof of the "pudding" because the 70 weeks alotted to the Jews was determined, "cut off" of this 2300 day-year prophecy. If the starting date of BC 457 was wrong we would not have Christ dying in the middle of the 70'th week of years which He absolutely did. That is proof positive that then the 2300 years reaches down to our year 1844.

"It is iron clad".

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

Da 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

Da 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

Da 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Gibs]

Addendum, The 70 week prophecy was fullfilled exactly as prophecied so we know then for sure and certain of the termination then of the 2300. 2300 - 457 = 1843. This should end any questions on this prophecy!

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Gibs]

Gibs, just for clarification, Do you mean to say that between His ascension and 1844, while He was in the Holy Place, Jesus made no atonement for sin, and that the atonement is only a Most Holy Place affair?

sky

Salvation was never closed, It followed Jesus through the door opened to the Most Holy place, the door to the Holy place is said to be then closed.

Atonement begins then when Jesus enters to cleanse all the records of all from Adam up through time, His work continues to the consumation. Many have His Blood applied, many don't. His reward is with Him when He comes.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[phkrause]

We do have proof of the "pudding" because the 70 weeks alotted to the Jews was determined, "cut off" of this 2300 day-year prophecy. If the starting date of BC 457 was wrong we would not have Christ dying in the middle of the 70'th week of years which He absolutely did. That is proof positive that then the 2300 years reaches down to our year 1844.

"It is iron clad".

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

Da 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

Da 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

Da 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

your absolutely right there is no way around that.

[skyblue888]

Atonement begins then when Jesus enters to cleanse all the records of all from Adam up through time, His work continues to the consumation. Many have His Blood applied, many don't. His reward is with Him when He comes.

Gibs

______________

Gibs, just what I thought you were saying. But inspiration clearly says that Jesus ascended up on High to make atonement for our transgression. But according to you no atomement was made until He entered the Most Holy Place.

"The intercession of Christ in our behalf is that of presenting His divine merits in the offering of Himself to the Father as our Substitute and Surety; for He ascended up on High to make atonement for our transgressions." F.W.105.

In 1844 He entered the Most Holy Place to begin the final phase of the atonement.

So the atonement is not limited to the Most Holy Place but is very much a part of the Holy Place. In the type there was the daily atonement in the first apartment and then there was the yearly atonement in the second apartment otherwise known as the final atonement.

sky

[Gibs]

Sky, take however you want it is Ok with me. Atonement begins with the cleansing of the Sanctuary as was portrayed by the type here on earth.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[skyblue888]

In "A Word to the Little Flock," published by James White in Brunswick, Maine, May 30, 1847, a statement by Sister White on the sanctuary should draw our attention. It is dated April 21, 1847, and written from Topsham, Maine. On page 12, we find these words from Mrs. White:

"I believe the Sanctuary to be cleansed at the end of the 2300 days, is the New Jerusalem Temple, of which Christ is a minister. The Lord showed me in vision, more than one year ago, that Brother Crosier had the true light, on the cleansing of the Sanctuary, etc., and that it was His will, that Brother Crozier should write out the view which he gave us in the Day-Star, Extra, February 7, 1846. I feel fully authorized by the Lord, to recommend that Extra to every saint. I pray that these lines may prove a blessing to you, and all the dear children who may read them." Signed E.G. White.

I own a copy of the Day-Star Extra for February 7, 1846, and on pages 40 and 41 of that issue I read Brother Crosier's article. After having discussed certain theories in which he does not believe, Brother Crozier observes:

"But again, they say that the atonement was made and finished on Calvary, when the Lamb of God expired. So men have taught us, and so the churches and world believe; but it is none the more true or sacred on that account, if unsupported by Divine authority. Perhaps few or none who hold that opinion have ever tested the foundation on which it rests.

1. If the atonement was made on Calvary, by whom was it made? The making of the atonement is the work of a Priest, but who officiated on Calvary?--Roman soldiers and wicked Jews.

2. The slaying of the victim was not making the atonement; the sinner slew the victim, Leviticus 4:1-4,13-15, etc., after that the Priest took the blood and made the atonement. Leviticus 4:5-12, 16-21.

3. Christ was appointed High Priest to make the atonement, and He certainly could not have acted in that capacity till after His resurrection, and we have no record of His doing any thing on earth after His resurrection, which could be called the atonement.

4. The atonement was made in the Sanctuary, but Calvary was not such a place.

5. He could not according to Hebrews 8:4 make atonement while on earth. "If He were on earth, He should not be a Priest." The Levitical was the earthly priesthood; the Divine Priesthood, the heavenly.

6. Therefore, He did not begin the work of making atonement, whatever the nature of that work may be, till after His ascension, when by His own blood He entered the heavenly sanctuary for us."

________________

This, then is the "true light", which the Lord showed Sister White in vision, had His approval, and which she felt fully authorized to recommend to every saint. Only as we downgrade Sister White can we reject this testimony of hers. I am not ready to do this.

So this shows that Christ began the work of atonement in the Holy Place at His ascension. And that implies that when He entered the Most Holy Place in 1844 He began the work of investigative judgment prior to making the final atonement.

sky

[Nic Samojluk]

I already addressed this concern of yours a number of times. Is it truly necessary to repeat the same thing so many times?

Yes! In Spanish there is a saying which states that repetition is the mother of wisdom. If I had the ability to remember everything other people have said in the past, I would have no need to ask questions.

I have a hard time remembering what I have stated before, and you want me to remember everything others have said? You are also assuming that I have the duty to read everything that is being posted.

Some postings are so long and so difficult to follow, that it would take a genius to decipher all of them and memorize what had been argued.

[BobRyan]

1. If the atonement was made on Calvary, by whom was it made? The making of the atonement is the work of a Priest, but who officiated on Calvary?--Roman soldiers and wicked Jews.

2. The slaying of the victim was not making the atonement; the sinner slew the victim, Leviticus 4:1-4,13-15, etc., after that the Priest took the blood and made the atonement. Leviticus 4:5-12, 16-21.

3. Christ was appointed High Priest to make the atonement, and He certainly could not have acted in that capacity till after His resurrection, and we have no record of His doing any thing on earth after His resurrection, which could be called the atonement.

4. The atonement was made in the Sanctuary, but Calvary was not such a place.

5. He could not according to Hebrews 8:4 make atonement while on earth. "If He were on earth, He should not be a Priest." The Levitical was the earthly priesthood; the Divine Priesthood, the heavenly.

6. Therefore, He did not begin the work of making atonement, whatever the nature of that work may be, till after His ascension, when by His own blood He entered the heavenly sanctuary for us."

1. Ellen White is adamant that the atoning sacrifice was full and complete at the cross.

2. 1John 2:2 states that fact clearly - on the cross Christ made the Atoning Sacrifice for all sins for all time.

3. Your problem is in confusing the full scope of atonement that we see in Lev 16 with the "Atoning Sacrifice" element in that Atonement.

In Lev 16 the doctrine of Atonement includes much more than the sin offering being sacrificed. That sacrifice is the "Atoning sacrifice" but it is not the full story in the Lev 16 model regarding the "Day of Atonement".

For the full scope of atonement to be complete - you must also include the work of the High Priest in the Most Holy Place. This is a work Christ did not start to do until Oct 22, 1844.

So definition and terms are everything.

Given the context above - it is no wonder that Ellen White frequently affirmed the fact that the Atoning Sacrifice was completed at the cross. Once for all!

SDAs should not go out of their way to generate confusion on that point.

in Christ,

Bob

[Gibs]

The atonement takes place in the Most Holy place and Jesus Christ did not go there untill 1844. Then the sanctuary was cleansed of the cases from Adam on.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Lysimachus]

Very well established Sky, very well established.

Crosier's first articles on this subject were irrefutable, yet cynics and skeptics the world over continue to assail these foundations and actually have the audacity to think they are gaining victory over them. If I were them, my conscience would be giving me sleepless nights. I pray that these truths torment the consciences of those who are so vehemently opposed to these blessed truths shining from the Throne of Heaven.

I find it amazing how the criticisms that spout out from the critics of the sanctuary doctrine end up having to evolve over time.

For instance, it was constantly argued that the Atonement was completed on the cross. But over the years, Adventists have demolished this argument to smithereens. Therefore, guess what? The critics, such as by Desmond Ford and even men like tall73, are forced to now add a twist--that no, it was not directly at the cross, but was completed the moment Christ ascended to heaven and went straight into the Most Holy Place. This they had to do after realizing the sheer logical failure of Atonement being completed on the cross. The simple order of the Levitical sanctuary procedures simply do not allow it.

How do they try to justify this argument?

By emphasizing a point in Hebrews 9:23--the very verse that Adventists have used to establish our sanctuary doctrine:

• "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." (Hebrews 9:12)

• "It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. " (Hebrews 9:23)

These texts, among many others, are used by the critics to try and show that Paul was speaking in the "past tense". This, they argue, "proves" that the sanctuary was cleansed upon His ascension and not in 1844.

But they devastatingly fail to account for the artistic/poetic style of the Hebrew authors. Often times the writers of the Bible wrote about things that were past as though they were yet future, and also they wrote about things future as though they were past.

Here are 2 examples:

In Matthew 11:14, Jesus spoke of John the Baptist and said that he 'is to come', yet John had already come and finished his mission at this point:

• "And if you are willing it, he is Elijah who is to come." (Matthew 11:14)

We also have examples where the Bible authors applied a future event as though it were past:

• "Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them." (Psalms 68:18)

King David wrote about Christ's ascension to heaven as though it were past! And as though the gifts of the Spirit already had poured out upon God's Church!

But this was yet about a millennium into the future!

Not to mention that the author of Hebrews quotes this very verse from David in Ephesians 4:8.

Paul is not speaking in terms of "chronology" in Hebrews. He is clearly speaking in terms of "significance", and what Christ is now "doing" for us, and what He will CONTINUE to do for us till the end of this world. (Hebrews 9:26).

[Nic Samojluk]

Gibs wrote:

“We do have proof of the "pudding" because the 70 weeks allotted to the Jews was determined, "cut off" of this 2300 day-year prophecy.”

Most translations read “determined” instead of “cut off.” The “cut off” choice interpretation was used by our pioneers in order to save face. We wanted the world to believe that our error in prophetic interpretation was not that bad—that we were right about the date after all and wrong only on the event, forgetting that the angel had predicted in Rev. 10 that our experience would be BITTER—not BITTERSWEET.

“If the starting date of BC 457 was wrong we would not have Christ dying in the middle of the 70'th week of years which He absolutely did.”

You just made the wrong assumption. The 457 date is adequate for the prophetic period found in chapter 9 of Daniel; while chapter 8 has it own context: the Battle between Alexander the Great with Medo-Persia which took place in 334 B.C.

“That is proof positive that then the 2300 years reaches down to our year 1844.”

This is only true if we agree that the “determined” term must be read as “cut off,” This is a big assumption which cannot be proved. The original Hebrew term has several connotations and we have chosen the wrong one. Let’s be humble and admit that our experience in 1844 was really BITTER—and not bittersweet!

[Lysimachus]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

1. If the atonement was made on Calvary, by whom was it made? The making of the atonement is the work of a Priest, but who officiated on Calvary?--Roman soldiers and wicked Jews.

2. The slaying of the victim was not making the atonement; the sinner slew the victim, Leviticus 4:1-4,13-15, etc., after that the Priest took the blood and made the atonement. Leviticus 4:5-12, 16-21.

3. Christ was appointed High Priest to make the atonement, and He certainly could not have acted in that capacity till after His resurrection, and we have no record of His doing any thing on earth after His resurrection, which could be called the atonement.

4. The atonement was made in the Sanctuary, but Calvary was not such a place.

5. He could not according to Hebrews 8:4 make atonement while on earth. "If He were on earth, He should not be a Priest." The Levitical was the earthly priesthood; the Divine Priesthood, the heavenly.

6. Therefore, He did not begin the work of making atonement, whatever the nature of that work may be, till after His ascension, when by His own blood He entered the heavenly sanctuary for us."

1. Ellen White is adamant that the atoning sacrifice was full and complete at the cross.

2. 1John 2:2 states that fact clearly - on the cross Christ made the Atoning Sacrifice for all sins for all time.

3. Your problem is in confusing the full scope of atonement that we see in Lev 16 with the "Atoning Sacrifice" element in that Atonement.

In Lev 16 the doctrine of Atonement includes much more than the sin offering being sacrificed. That sacrifice is the "Atoning sacrifice" but it is not the full story in the Lev 16 model regarding the "Day of Atonement".

For the full scope of atonement to be complete - you must also include the work of the High Priest in the Most Holy Place. This is a work Christ did not start to do until Oct 22, 1844.

So definition and terms are everything.

Given the context above - it is no wonder that Ellen White frequently affirmed the fact that the Atoning Sacrifice was completed at the cross. Once for all!

SDAs should not go out of their way to generate confusion on that point.

in Christ,

Bob

You do realize that the part that you quoted from Sky was not actually written by Sky?

Those 6 points were written by O.R.L. Crosier. The one EGW endorsed. Just thought I'd point that out.

Ellen White endorsed what Crosier said because she knew well what he meant by "atonement" in this context. He was referring not to the sacrificial atonement, but atonement for mankind in general. She did us service, however, by making clear that the sacrificial atonement was complete on the cross. This truth does not negate Crosier's points.

[skyblue888]

Exactly and by "sacrificial atonement" she did not mean that the atonement was made on the cross but that "the condition for the atonement" was complete.

"Christ's sacrifice in behalf of men was full and complete. The CONDITION for the atonement had been fulfilled." A.A.29.

This is to say in no uncertain terms that what is called the sacrificial atonement is not the atonement itself but the condition for the atonement. Christ ascended up on High to begin the atonement. The atonement consists in presenting or pleading the merits of His shed blood before the Father in our behalf.

sky

[skyblue888]

The atonement as made my Christ in the first apartment of the sanctuary above consisted in presenting or pleading the merits of His shed blood (for our transgressions) before the Father in our behalf and the making of the final atonement at the end of the investigative judgment, at the end the loud cry, when the mission of the Gospel shall be completed, which shall cleanse the sanctuary of all the sins of the righteous recorded there to be transfered onto Satan the scapegoat.

sky

*When He entered the Most Holy Place in 1844 He did not stop making atonement for He continued to plead the merits of His shed blood in our behalf until He shall make the final atonement which shall cleanse the sanctuary.

[Lysimachus]

Gibs wrote:

“We do have proof of the "pudding" because the 70 weeks allotted to the Jews was determined, "cut off" of this 2300 day-year prophecy.”

Most translations read “determined” instead of “cut off.” The “cut off” choice interpretation was used by our pioneers in order to save face.

[cheddar]

The seventy weeks are ‘cut off’ from the 2300 days but they’re cutoff at the end not the beginning.

The close of probation for ‘spiritual Israel’ and the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary both end on the same day.

If something if ‘cut off’ from something else it’s usually cut off at the end not the beginning.

Please show from Daniel that the seventy weeks are cut off at the beginning because if you can’t there is a 50/50 chance of you being right. Are you a gambler? Let’s spin the wheel of prophetic interpretation.

[Lysimachus]

The seventy weeks are ‘cut off’ from the 2300 days but they’re cutoff at the end not the beginning.

The close of probation for ‘spiritual Israel’ and the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary both end on the same day.

If something if ‘cut off’ from something else it’s usually cut off at the end not the beginning.

Please show from Daniel that the seventy weeks are cut off at the beginning because if you can’t there is a 50/50 chance of you being right. Are you a gambler? Let’s spin the wheel of prophetic interpretation.

Simple: The 490 years or 70 weeks commence in 457 B.C. How can you possibly cut off the 70 weeks from the end of the 2300 years when 457 B.C. was only some 60+ years after Daniel had his vision in Daniel 8? No matter where you begin the 2300 years, this would place the 70 weeks almost some 2000 years future from Daniel's day. The Decree of Artaxerxes was in the 5th century B.C.

The logic utterly fails. Unless you do not believe that command to build and restore Jerusalem has anything to do with the restoration by the Persian monarchs?