“daily sacrifice” (tamid) in the Hebrew sanctuary was a whole sweet-savor burnt offering which began each
evening ('ereb) and again began each morning (boqer) of the year -- including the
Day of Atonement. The tamid consisted of two lambs of the first year without spot. Since its appeasement-communication
with God never ceased, it was also called the “continual,” or “perpetual,” offering. Because the blood
of the tamid was neither a sin nor guilt offering, it was always poured out at the base of the great altar and its
flesh was never eaten by priests (Numb. 28:1-7).
tamid was the first, or foundational, sacrifice which allowed all of the other sacrifices to follow. Therefore, every
part of the sanctuary service depended on the “daily sacrifice.” Without the tamid, nothing else could
be offered. And, conversely, if defilement occurred in any part of the sanctuary, the tamid was also considered to
tamid made it possible for sin to be atoned and forgiven via the sin offerings which followed it. Again, the tamid
was not the sin offering itself! Even on the Day of Atonement, like all other days, the tamid was offered first and
last. Without the tamid, there could be no Day of Atonement sacrifice (Numb. 29:11).
the book of Daniel tamid is correctly called the “daily sacrifice” all five times it is used (, 12, 13; ; ). The
tamid is identical with “evening-morning” (‘ereb boqer). Its context requires it to be understood
as the “evening and morning daily sacrifice” in the Israelite sanctuary service. The “daily ministry”
of the priests is not the same as the “daily sacrifice.” Although their day began and ended with
the tamid, the Adaily ministry@ included everything the ordinary priests normally did.
Tamid’s first occurrence in Daniel 8:11 is agreed to
by all, including SDAs, to be a reference to the “evening-morning” sacrifice (‘ereb-boqer) of the
JerusalemTemple. The only disagreement about is whether
the text refers to its defilement by Antiochus IV in 167 B. C. or pagan Rome in A. D. 70. However, is very
controversial. While most today say it refers to Antiochus, SDAs teach that it now refers to papal Rome which desolated the truth about Christ's ministry in the heavenly sanctuary, especially through priestly confessions.
oddly, the SDA interpretation of Daniel 8:11-14 explains the removal of the “daily sacrifice” in three very different
ways. (1) In it is the JerusalemTemple which was destroyed by the little horn of pagan Rome in A. D. 70. (2) In it is the heavenly sanctuary which was desolated by the little horn of papal Rome when the confessional was made mandatory in A. D. 1215. (3) In it is the heavenly sanctuary which was defiled by the
confessed and forgiven sins of God’s children since Adam=s first sin. Again, there is simply no continuity between these three different explanations!
SDA interpretation of -14 would require
three completely different kinds of cleansings. (1) The first would require a non-Day of Atonement dedication when
the temple was rebuilt. (2) The second defilement (according to SDAs) would be restored by the “truth”
taught by the SDA remnant church since 1844 to repudiate the confessional. (However, as Protestants they should teach that
this refutation was actually given by the Reformers 300 years earlier.) (3) Only the third requires a Day of Atonement
type of cleansing similar to Leviticus 16. Again, there is simply too much disconnect (no continuity) between these three
concepts. None of these three would correctly require the actual re-dedication of 164 B. C. referred to in .
previously discussed, the tamid began and ended every day of the year, even on the Day of Atonement. The Bible emphasizes
that the little horn of -12 desolated
the “daily” and the entire sanctuaryB not merely the Most Holy Place! The daily ministration of priests in the Holy Place was also completely stopped by the little horn.
greatly contradict themselves here. While they teach that “desolating the daily” in Daniel 8:11-12 caused the
entire sanctuary to be defiled, they then teach that defiling the “daily” in 8:13 only required the Most Holy
Place to be cleansed in 8:14! This necessary manipulation of the facts allows them to teach that Christ has continued daily
ministering inside the Holy
Place since His
ascension. Yet He could not minister inside the Most Holy Place because it was still defiled!!!
2300 ‘ereb-boqer (daily sacrificial cycles) have passed, then the sanctuary will be restored.”The text plainly states that the daily cycles will cease until
the end of 2300 sacrificial cycles.
a Protestant viewpoint, Seventh-day Adventists are actually more guilty of “casting down the truth” about Christ’s
high priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary than are Roman Catholics. SDAs deny that Christ has been performing a uniquely
high priestly ministry inside the Most Holy Place since His ascension. SDAs have destroyed the “truth” about any activity by Christ as high priest
before 1844. Yet Roman Catholics teach that the confessional exists because Christ has indeed been ministering in heaven since
his ascension and priests are His representatives on earth. Roman Catholics do not teach that the confessional replaced the
necessity of Christ=s intercessory
Antiochus IV “took away the daily sacrifices” (and all others) when he polluted the sanctuary in 167 B. C., as
recorded in Daniel . The reliable (though
not without mistake) historical books of First Maccabees-47, Second Maccabees 6:1 and Josephus agree. Even the SDA Bible Dictionary admits * “Jews
at the time of Christ applied the prophecy of Daniel to the desolation of the Temple by Antiochus Epiphanes” and gives references to the writings of Josephus. Then they admit “Christ
applied the expression ‘abomination of desolation’ to the [pagan] Romans.” See SDA Bible Dictionary,
1960, “daily,” 243.
question of Daniel 8:13 asked how long the vision would last before the “daily sacrifice,” the tamid, would
cease “to be trodden under foot.” And the answer in was that 2300 daily sacrifices, ‘ereb-boqer (not “days,” yom) would lapse
before restoration (tsadaq, not taheer). Since the Old Covenant Day of Atonement did not restore the
“daily sacrifice,” but always followed it, then Daniel cannot possibly be a reference to the Day of Atonement. A defiled “daily sacrifice” could
only be restored by “dedication” (hanukah) and not by a Day of Atonement taheer. The “daily” was called the “continual”
because it never ceased, not even on the Day of Atonement. The only logical reason for using tsa-daq (for re-dedication)
in Daniel 8:14 instead of ta-heer (from the Leviticus 16 cleansing) is because the defilement of the daily was caused
by the little horn and not by the Day of Atonement’s general sinfulness of God’s people.
Christ died to fulfill all types of sacrificial offerings. As the “daily” lamb of God, the whole sweet-savor sacrifice,
He died wholly for us (Lev. -13). As
the sin and guilt-offering lamb of God, His blood was brought into the sanctuary and sprinkled before the veil (Heb. ). As the Passover lamb of God, His body is symbolically
eaten by believers (Mt. 26:26). As the goat of atonement on the Day of Atonement, He died once for all time for all sin (Heb.
-28). As the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement he forever
carried away the sins of believers.
Enter supporting content here
Russell Earl Kelly, PH. D., 6610 Skyview Dr SE, Acworth,Ga 30101