THE OLD COVENANT DAILY SACRIFICE
Dan. 8:11, 12, 13; 11:31; 12:11 “daily sacrifice” (KJV,
NIV); “regular sacrifice” (NAS); “continual burnt offering” (RSV); tamid (Hebrew); Strong’s
Dan. 8:14 “days” ( KJV); “evenings and mornings” (NAS; RSV; NIV); ('ereb-boqer) Hebrew
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).
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 be defiled.
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).
In the book
of Daniel tamid is correctly called the “daily sacrifice” all five times it is used (8:11, 12, 13; 11:31; 12:11). 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 daily ministry included everything the
ordinary priests normally did.
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 Jerusalem Temple. The only disagreement about
8:11 is whether the text refers to its defilement
by Antiochus IV in 167 B. C. or pagan Rome
in A. D. 70. However, 8:12 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.
Therefore, oddly, the SDA interpretation
of Daniel 8:11-14 explains the removal of the “daily sacrifice” in three very different ways.
(1) In 8:11 it is the Jerusalem Temple which was
destroyed by the little horn of pagan Rome
in A. D. 70.
In 8:12 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 8:14 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!
interpretation of 8:11-14 would require three
completely different kinds of cleansings.
(1) The first would require a non-Day of Atonement dedication when the temple was rebuilt.
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 8:14.
As 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 8:11-12 desolated the “daily” and the entire sanctuary -- not merely the Most Holy Place! The daily ministration of priests in the Holy Place was also completely stopped by the little horn.
SDAs 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.
From 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 ministry.
Antiochus IV “took away the daily sacrifices” (and all others) when he polluted the sanctuary in 167 B. C., as
recorded in Daniel 11:31. The reliable (though
not without mistake) historical books of First Maccabees 1:45-47, 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.
The 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 8:14 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 8:14 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.
Jesus 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. 1:11-13). As the sin and guilt-offering lamb of God, His
blood was brought into the sanctuary and sprinkled before the veil (Heb. 12:24). 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. 9:19-28). As the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement he forever carried away the sins of believers.