Thomas,

I haven't read what is in the link provided, just read the paragraphs you posted, where he says many things but doesn't mention specifically his objctions. In the end, he says,

"Having made that sacrifice, Christ entered the Most Holy
Place--'heaven itself'--to appear in the presence of God on our behalf."

He here equates the most holy place with heaven (the common opinion of our evangelical friends), which begs the question, What is the holy place? or, What did the holy place symbolize?

At this point I don't see much evidence for it, no. The cleansing was from the defiling of the little horn.

Accordingly, predictive prophecy is always conditional on the response of the people to whom it is addressed. Its function is not to demonstrate divine foreknowledge nor does it necessarily predetermine the course of events, for if it did it would thereby deprive people of the power of choice. Its intended purpose is to enable them to make wise choices in the present by indicating the ultimate result of either a right or a wrong choice. For this reason Bible prophecy, even apocalyptic prophecy, is always conditional, and its time element is always flexible, in order to provide for the free exercise of human choice.69 It is a preview of what can be, not what necessarily will be.

B. Why would it be a problem for a 2000 year gap or a 2000 year fulfillment? You already have a 150 year day of atonement as it is.

His main thesis seems to be founded on the premise that the historicist method of interpretation lacks foundation. I dont know wether this is true or not.

That is a good question, one which I have no answer to. But it does seem reasonable that since anything that is holy recieves its holiness through its relation to God, the place where God most manifests His presence would be the most Holy place, ie the place Jesus would go to to be in the Fathers presence.

Sometimes she mentions doors, sometimes she mentions veils, sometimes she mentions that Christ passed from one compartment to the other. It’s much more probable that these references are symbolic, both in her writings and in the Bible. When Paul mentions that our hope enters into that which is within the veil, does he refer to a literal veil in heaven, or does he just mean the presence of God? So, if Ellen White’s visions are symbolic, her reference is to a two-phase ministry of Christ.

Tall, this argument is completely unreasonable. Of course this was a special humiliation of soul in view of a specially solemn occasion. But the main point of the type not that; it is that those who clang to their sins were cut off from the people, and this typifies a judgment. The argument about repentance being “in real time” makes so much sense as saying that the saved cannot rejoice on the occasion of their reunion in heaven (see Lev. 23:40) because all people rejoice during their lifetime.


One prominent Bible emphasis is Jesus’ s exaltation after the cross.

“And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name” (Phil. 2:8,9).

“But we see Jesus, who for a little while was made lower than the angels, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death” (Heb. 2:9).

The text you quoted says:

“Who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. For to which of the angels did He ever say: ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You’?” (Heb. 1:3-5).

The text quotes Psalms 2:7. So does Heb. 5:5, which speaks of Christ’s glorification as High Priest. But Ps. 2:7 is quoted in Acts 13:33 for Christ’s resurrection.

So, Christ’s resurrection and enthronement are seen as a joint event in the Bible – as His exaltation after the cross.

“This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear” (Acts 2:32, 33)

So I see Heb. 1:3 as a reference to Christ’s exaltation after the cross.

I see no presentation of blood at Christ’s ascension except for His inauguration as High Priest and His dedication of the sanctuary.

I see Heb. 9:23 as a generic reference to the cleansing of a sanctuary, not a specific reference to the day of atonement. There was a cleansing before the sanctuary was put into use. Paul refers to this in vv.21, 22, and it is in this context that v. 23 follows:


21 Then likewise he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry.
22 And according to the law almost all things are purified with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission.
23 Therefore it was necessary that the copies of the things in the heavens should be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
24 For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us.

If you read these verses with the dedication of the sanctuary in mind, the context becomes completely different.

Maybe this should have had its own thread, but here it gets the atention of those qualified to evaluate it sooner.

Thomas,

I haven't read what is in the link provided, just read the paragraphs you posted, where he says many things but doesn't mention specifically his objctions. In the end, he says,

"Having made that sacrifice, Christ entered the Most Holy
Place--'heaven itself'--to appear in the presence of God on our behalf."

He here equates the most holy place with heaven (the common opinion of our evangelical friends), which begs the question, What is the holy place? or, What did the holy place symbolize?