Marc Rasell and Russell Kelly,
Oct 29, 2009
Marc: Just a few points to add
to my e-mail:
1. Translation of Daniel 8:13:
This verse begins with the Hebrew
“ad-matay” which is often translated as “how long” (KJV, RSV, NASB, TEV). However the Hebrew literally
means “until when” which puts the emphasis not on the duration (how long) but on the termination (until
when) and what follows. In the answer in verse 14 we are told “until”…”then”…which
confirms that the emphasis is on what happens at the end of the 2300 days.
The word “concerning”
is not in the Hebrew, there is no genitive construct. Therefore the 2300 days involves the whole vision of chapter 8 and starts
in the Persian era.
……………………………………
Kelly: According to your own
admission the vision of Daniel chapter 8 would END at the END of the 2300 ereb-boqer. Yet SDAs only BEGIN the END in 1844.
That is ridiculous! You added "and what follows" without any justification other than to justify your wrong interpretation.
……………………………………
Marc: The word sacrifice is
not in the Hebrew, as daily covers more than just sacrifices, it covers the daily shewbread, lamp stand etc.
……………………………………
Kelly: The word "daily" primarily
relates to the daily evening and morning whole burnt offering which was offered even on the Day of Atonement. The showbread
was offered weekly when the course changed. It certainly did not refer to the Day of Atonement exclusively which was a YEARLY
occurrence. The daily was cleansed in BC 165 to purify it from the desecration of the great altar by Antiochus IV.
…………………..
Marc: Literally: “Until
when the vision, the continual service and the transgression causing horror, to make both sanctuary and host a trampling?”
……………………..
Kelly: Please tell me WHEN do
SDAs teach that the "daily" was first defiled? And is the daily in heaven still defiled? If the daily in heaven was defiled
before 1844, then Christ could not be ministering with a defiled daily. If it is still defiled, then Christ could not be ministering
now. When you equate the defiling of the daily with the Day of Atonement, you really step into a quandry. Again, tell me when
the daily was defiled and when it was restored!!!
………………………….
Marc: 2. The verb (sdq) only appears once in its passive niphal form and the meaning has been lost. The root
word is linked to a wide range of meanings including zakah clean: Ps. 51:4, Job 25:4; 15:14 and taher pure: Job 4:17; 17:9. Other meanings
can be deducted by this process: perfect, blameless, truth, just, vindicate, accountable, faithful, salvation, right, holy,
equity, judgment, peace, glory, innocence, wisdom. However many ancient translations including the LXX translate it as cleansed,
including Theodotion, Vulgate, Syriac and Coptic.
……………………..
Kelly: Rather than accept the
common use of tsadeq you choose to use the least common and obscure in order to
avoid admitting that it does not refer to the Day of Atonement in Daniel 8:14. What kind of cleansing do you think was used
when Solomon's temple was dedicated, when it was rededicated in BC 515 and when it was rededicated in BC 165? Those dedications
and rededications were NOT Day of Atonement dedications. The focus of Daniel 8:13-14 is on a rededication and not on a Day
of Atonement taher cleansing. What argument do you use to prove that it refers
to the Day of Atonement?
……………………….
Marc: 3. Different terminology
is used for the Lord’s goat and the scapegoat:
Scapegoat: “But the goat
on which the lot for the scapegoat fell shall be presented alive before the Lord,
to make atonement upon it, to send it into the wilderness as the scapegoat.
(verse 10)
Lord’s goat: “He
shall make atonement for the holy place” (verse 16)
…………………………
Kelly: No. Identical terminology
was used for both goats.
(1) Both were chosen by the
congregation.
(2) Both were equally qualified
to be chosen.
(3) Both were presented as one
sin offering.
(4) Both were presented "before
the LORD" which made BOTH equally "most holly" as a sin offering.
………………………….
Marc: The type of atonement for the scapegoat is similar to when a blasphemer was stoned, the congregation first
laid hands on him Lev. 24:14.
……………………….
Kelly: You are really reaching
here. There is no goat or sacrificial animal involved here. Why don't you reply to the texts I refer to where two birds are
used for one sin offering and one is released alive?
……………………….
Marc: When someone sinned high handedly Num. 15:30 there was no sacrifice for sin, this type of defiling of the sanctuary was illegal and could only
be cleansed by the death of the sinner.
………………………
Kelly: You are arguing my point!
No presumptuous, premeditated, high-handed sin was ever brought to the sanctuary for sacrifice and atonement. Since those
sins were punished instead of forgiven, they would not be entered into the books of heaven. Why, why, why does not SDA theology
explain where these sins are in your Investigative Judgment scenario?
……………………………..
Marc: For those who were penitent, their sins were transferred to the sanctuary. The idea of the sanctuary being
defiled in this way is a paradox which speaks of the work of Christ who is holy, yet took upon Himself our sins so we could
be saved. We received His righteousness by faith.
……………………………..
Kelly: Wrong. Their "sins" were
not transferred TO the sanctuary. Their "sins" were washed away at the entrance when the sacrificial animal died. Those atoned
sins did not enter into the sanctuary to defile it.
…………………………….
Marc: So even though the sanctuary
was defiled, yet it remained holy at the same time. The same paradox applies to Christ as the Lamb of God and the sacrificial
animals which pointed to Him.
…………………………..
Kelly: You are saying that "even
though the sanctuary was defiled with all atoned sins of all forgiven men, it is still holy. That is absurd at every point
and totally illogical. When you realize this you will begin to study yourself out of that false church like I did.
………………………….
Marc: 4. The sanctuary symbols
have a three fold fulfillment: Christological, Ecclesiological and Eschatological. E.g. Christ is the Lord’s goat (Lev.
16), the church is cleansed near the end of time (Mal. 3), the heavenly temple is cleansed and all sin comes to an end after
the return of Christ (Daniel 8:14; Rev. 20-22).
………………………….
Kelly: Only SDAs follow this
sequence.
………………………….
Marc: 5. The common terminology
between Daniel 8 and 9:
a) The word “mareh”
(vision) is used in 8:26-27 to refer to the part of the vision about the evenings and mornings, whereas “hazon” (vision) is used
to refer to the whole vision of chapter 8.
…………………………….
Kelly: The sanctuary of Daniel
8:10-12 is the one on earth. The sanctuary of Daniel 9 is the one on earth. You cannot jump from earth to heaven in 8:14 and remain I context.
The last part of Daniel 8 is
used by Dispensationalists to refer to the last day antichrist who is a type of Antiochus from Matthew 24:15. Even if wrong,
you must admit that their interpretation is far superior to your own.
……………………..
Marc: In 9:23 the angel says
understand the “mareh” (vision), a clear link back to the evenings and mornings of chapter 8 as there is no vision
in chapter 9.
b) The use of the word “bin”
(understand): Daniel did not “understand” the “mareh” (vision) of the 2300 days (8:15), he was dismayed
by the “mareh” (vision) and did not “understand” it (8:27).
In 9:22-23 the angel returns
to help Daniel “understand” the “mareh” (vision).
……………………………
Russ: The vision of Daniel 9
brings us to Christ. It does not bring us to 1844. The end of the vision of Daniel 9 brings us to the second coming of Christ.
It does not bring us to 1844. The little horn of Daniel 8 becomes a type of the
Roman Empire which destroyed
the Temple in AD 70. It then becomes a type of the antichrist of the last days in Revelation 11-18 which destroys the harlot false
church. It does not bring us to either BC 457 or AD 1844. William Miller never used BC 457 and EGW's use of it in the GC is
very deceptive.
………………………
Marc: 6. Hebrews never says
Jesus went into the MHP, it says He entered the “ta hagia” which means holy places and is a designation for the
sanctuary as a whole.
…………………………….
Kelly: The context of Hebrews
9 is that of Moses inaugurating the Old Covenant even before the sanctuary pattern had been given. The New Covenant inauguration
did not require a Day of Atonement re-enactment because is inauguration followed Christ's Day of Atonement sacrifice at Calvary.
…………………………
Marc: If the author wanted to
specify the MHP he could have said “hagia hagion”. In the LXX “ta hagia” is used in the plural: 97
times for the sanctuary, 6 times for the holy place and only 1 time for the most holy place. These figures are subject to
variant readings, doubtful uses and the human factor.
In Hebrews 9:25 “ta hagia”
is translated:
Goodspeed: sanctuary
Knox: sanctuary
NEB: sanctuary
ERV: holy place
ASV: holy place
RSV: Holy Place
KJV: holy place
Moffatt: holy place:
Wuest: Holy of Holies
Phillips: Holy of Holies
NIV: Most Holy Place
Most of these translations are
incorrect because the phrase “ta hagia” us used predominately for the sanctuary as a whole and not for one specific
compartment. Goodspeed, Knox and NEB are correct according to the Greek.
………………………………
Kelly: I have 18 semester hours
in Greek from an SDA college. Yes, ta hagia, refers to the sanctuary --the whole
sanctuary!
You ignore the many texts that
very clearly point out that Christ entered into the Presence of the Father and sat down at his right hand AT HIS ASCENTION
between the cherubim which means inside the Most Holy Place. Wherever God is --that is the Most Holy Place!
The phrase, “within
the veil (inside the vail)” occurs six (6) in the Old Testament and always refers to the Most Holy Place, particularly on the Day of Atonement in Leviticus 16. See Ex. 26:33; Lev. 16:2, 12, 15; Numb. 18:7. The phrase, “without
the veil (outside the vail)” occurs four (4) times in the Old Testament and always refers to the Most Holy Place. See Ex. 26:35; 27:21; 40:22; Lev. 24:3.
For all except SDAs, the fifteen (15) “right hand” texts make it absolutely clear that Jesus was in His
Father's presence inside the Most Holy Place in the heavenly sanctuary since His ascension. The texts are self-explanatory and unambiguous
in their destruction of SDA theology. Acts 2:33, “Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted.” Acts
2:34, “The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit on my right hand.”
Acts 5:31, “Him has God exalted with his right hand to be a
Prince and a Savior.” Acts 7:55, “But [Stephen], being full of the Holy Spirit, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God,
and Jesus standing on the right hand of God.” Acts 7:56, “Behold,
I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.” Romans 8:34, “[Christ] is even at the right hand of God, who also makes
intercession for us.” Ephesians 1:20, “[God] set him at his own
right hand in the heavenly places.” Colossians 3:1, “Christ sits
on the right hand of God.” Hebrews 1:3, “[Christ] sat down on
the right hand of the Majesty on high.” Hebrews 1:13, “But
to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand.” Hebrews
8:1, “We have such a high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne
of the Majesty in the heavens.” Hebrews 10:12, “But this man,
after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God.” Hebrews 12:2, “[Christ] is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.” First Peter 3:22, “Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God.” Revelation 5:7, “And [Christ] came and took the book
out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne.”
Likewise, the eleven (11) “between the cherubim” texts are also self-explanatory in their destruction of
SDA theology. Exodus 25:22, “I
will commune with you from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim which are upon the ark of the testimony.”
Numbers 7:89, “[Moses] heard the voice of one speaking unto him from
off the mercy seat that was upon the ark of testimony, from between the two cherubim: and he spoke unto him.” “The
LORD of hosts, which dwells between the cherubim,” First Samuel
4:4; Second Samuel 6:2; Second Kings 19:15; First Chronicles 13:6; Psalm 80:1; Isaiah 37:16. “[God] sits between the
cherubim,” Psalm 99:1. [God’s throne is] “between the cherubim,” Ezekiel 10:1-7.
……………………………
Marc: 7. The time period for
the little horn of 1260 days is linked to that of the sea beast in Revelation:
- Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3, 12:6, 14, 13:5.
The little horn is destroyed
“not by human hands”, and the sea beast is destroyed at the return of Christ. They both share the same time frame
for persecuting the saints, they both blaspheme God and attack the saints.
…………………….
Kelly: You do not need to repeat
all of this to me. I know the arguments as well as you. If the 1260 "days" ended in 1798, tell me WHY the little horn was
not destroyed then? Tell me what the 1798 has to do with 1844. Tell me where the SDA church would be if Christ has returned
in 1844. Tell me what any of this has to do with Daniel 8:14 and the Day of Atonement which you say only began in 1844. I
see no connection but only rambling dates.
………………………..
Marc: The papacy claimed to
be able to forgive sins and change God’s law and persecuted the saints. The period of persecution is from 538-1798 AD.
…………………………
Kelly: How did the papacy's
claim to change God's law answer Daniel's question of 8:13? Antiochus IV literally changed times and laws when he began persecuting
Jews from BC 171 to 165. How did the confessional of the 12th century relate to the question of Daniel 8:13? I have read and
re-read Lives of the Popes several times and have several articles about the papacy
on my site. During overwhelming majority of 538-17989 the papacy was the pawn of either France, Italy, Spain, Germany or Austria.
It was nowhere near the fierce ruler and persecutor which SDAs describe. Another false change of history.
………………………….
Marc: Historians have recognized
that pagan Rome collapsed in the 6th century and papal Rome began its rise to power.
…………………………
Kelly: No. Pagan Rome in the
West collapsed in AD 476 and Eastern pagan Rome did not end until 1453. Papal Rome took over the vacuum in Rome in 476 but
was confined to its own vicinity and controlled by other nations about 90% of the time between 538 and 1798. The only time
it had real power was when the other nations were fighting each other in civil wars. The winner controlled the papacy.
…………………………..
Marc: In 1798 AD after years
of decline the Pope was captured by Napoleon.
……………………………
Kelly: What does this have to
do with Daniel 8:10-14?
………………………….
Marc: In 538 AD after the three
Arian powers were destroyed or no longer a threat to Rome’s power
……………………….
Kelly: In Daniel 7 the 3 little
horns uprooted by the little horn were part of the beast. That is not true of the Arian horns which were never part of pagan
Rome.
…………………………..
Marc: …. the recognition in 533 AD by the emperor that the Bishop of Rome was supreme could now be put into effect.
The Ostrogoths did survive after 538 AD but were never able in the same way to subjugate Rome, the decisive victory occurred
early on in the campaign, although they did a lot of damage to Italy and helped bring down pagan Rome.
……………………………
Kelly: AD 538 is an invention.
Justinian was very oppressive of the papacy. Its rule did not extend outside of a strip in Italy. The church in Africa opposed
it until the Muslims destroyed it in the 8th century. The church in Eastern Europe opposed it because they were ruled by the
Eastern Emperor.
…………………………
Marc: The attempt to change
times and laws in Daniel is the attempt to change the Sabbath to Sunday which is the only law that deals with time.
…………………………
Kelly: Explain Ex 31:13-17.
The Old Covenant Sabbath was only given to national Israel and God commanded them not to share their covenant with others.
……………………….
Because the little horn is linked
to papal Rome it cannot be Antiochus who was not destroyed supernaturally and does not continue until the return of Christ.
……………………….
Kelly: Jesus linked the little
horn to Antiochus. The Jews linked him to Antiochus. It took supernatural intervention for the Jews to defeat the Seleucid-Syrian
Empire. Dispensationalists link the little horn to pagan Rome and to the antichrist who will appear in the last days. Your argument that the little horn will not be destroyed until the Second Coming is
based upon the same re-application at that of Dispensationalists and does not prove a thing.
………………………….
8. In a previous e-mail I made
the point that although in the wilderness type the Presence was usually associated with the MHP, the heavenly reality could
be different because Paul makes a number of changes based on Scripture as the reality is greater than its shadow. However
even in the wilderness tabernacle God’s Presence could be manifested in other places (Ex. 29:42-44; 30:6-7, 35-36).
In the heavenly temple based on Revelation 4-5, Exodus 25:9, 40 and Daniel 7:9-10 which suggests movement, God’s Presence
is not limited to the MHP.
…………………………
Kelly: The Most Holy Place is
such because it is where God is. God's Presence makes it the Most Holy Place. Wherever God is --that is the Most Holy Place.
You have got to stop limiting God to a room!
……………………………………
The changes Paul makes are as
follows: Psalm 110:4 for the new priesthood, Psalm 40:6-8 for the new sacrifice, Jeremiah 31:31-34 for the new covenant, Exodus
25:40 for the superior heavenly sanctuary. We cannot be dogmatic in insisting that the heavenly temple replicate its earthly
shadow, because it was a shadow. There is a correspondence between the two, and any changes need to be substantiated with
Scripture. It could be said that the differences were foreshadowed.
…………………………..
Kelly: Read my chapter on Pattern
Fulfillment. Hebrews 8 and 9 repeatedly point out that the OT pattern has been dissolved.
………………………….
9. A text to consider is Malachi
3 which speaks of Jesus suddenly coming to His temple and a purifying of God’s people before His return to earth.
………………………….
Kelly: Malachi 3 is partially
fulfilled by Nehemiah himself in Nehemiah 13. It is also fulfilled when Jesus cleansed the temple twice. This argues against
your theology. Jesus was able to cleanse the Temple without entering into its inner rooms.
…………………………..
Also Daniel 7:9-10 pictures
the investigative judgment where the court is seated and the books are opened and a multitude of beings are present.
………………………….
Kelly: The little horn is being
judged in Daniel 7, not the saints. There is not future condemnation of believers according to John 3:16; 5:24; Romans 5:1;
8:1; Hebrews 9:25-28 etc, etc, etc.
………………………….
The reason for this is that
sin began in heaven, so God’s character is under attack by Satan who also challenges God’s Laws. The judgment
shows in an open way before the universe that God is just and merciful.
………………………….
Kelly: You are dribbling SDA-isms
that are now seen in Daniel. Daniel is not about the church. Daniel is about God's dealing with national Israel.
………………………….
At the same time there are many
who profess to be believers but who do not practice what they preach, so a judgment is necessary to determine who are genuine
believers. The judgment is given in favour of the saints (7:22).
………………………….
Kelly: Aha. The greatest SDA
heresy. Nobody, absolutely nobody, can know for sure that they have been saved because they have not been judged yet.
………………………….
During the millennial judgment
in Rev. 20 the saints also get to participate in the judgment of the wicked, so they also will see that God is fair.
………………………….
Kelly: I understood this to
refer to God finally keeping all of his unconditional promises to national Israel. God is ruling Israel on earth and the saints
are participating as rulers and judges.
………………………….
Then the City descends to earth,
the wicked are destroyed in the fire and the earth cleansed and remade into an Eden paradise.
………………………….
Kelly: You have taken this out
of sequence. The New Jerusalem does not descend to the new earth until AFTER the Great White Throne Judgment at the end of
Revelation 20.
………………………….
10. I sent some tables in my
last e-mail, I don’t know if you receive html or plain text so I have repeated them here:
The movement from holy to most
holy corresponding to the feast days. The autumn feasts in the 7th month have their main focus on the return of
Christ, and the spring ones on the death of Christ:
…………………………
Kelly: SDAs love charts because
they can convince the simple not to perform deep study themselves. My point is that the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement
are identical to the daily sacrifices in that they result in cleansing and atonement. The difference is that the Day of Atonement
was a year-end final cleansing of previously unatoned sins.
……………………………..
Difference between the wilderness
tabernacle and heavenly temple:
……………………………
Kelly: I agree with your chart.
……………………………
……………………………
……………………………
Reply and Response from First
Exchange
Read first exchange to get full
discussion.
Marc: I believe Hebrews was not referring to a veil in heaven …
but it does not follow that there is no veil in heaven, Hebrews never tells us what is in the heavenly temple. Paul is just
using the earthly tabernacle as a parable (heb. 9:9). The evidence from Revelation 4-5 suggests the Presence is not limited
to the MHP, but moves between Holy and Most Holy Place.
………………………….
Kelly: Again, where God is --there the MHP is. It is the MHP because God is there. Why would a heavenly sanctuary
need a veil?
…………………………
2. ANTIOCHUS IV EPIPHANES:
Russ: The SDA argument is weak because no new "animal" arose to replace the goat of Greece. The pattern in Daniel
2 was to bring up a new metal and the pattern in Daniel 7 and 8 was to bring up a new animal for a new kingdom.
…………………………..
Marc: There is a reason for that, because both were sacrificial animals, and the little horn of Daniel 8 covers
both pagan and papal Rome.
………………………….
Russ: The little horn of Daniel 8 is a little horn from the Greek goat and no new nation is introduced with a new
animal.
…………………………
Even in chapter 7 the little horn is part of the terrible beast so there are two powers in one beast.
……………………………
Russ: No. The little horn is a ruler of the beast. It is not a new nation.
……………………………
And in chapter 2 the iron does extend into the toes.
…………………………..
Russ: Yes it does. The feet and toes are part iron.
…………………………..
Marc: the ten tribes or horns replaces pagan Rome, they took its territory, but three were plucked up. This is
the second stage.
…………………………..
Russ: Make up your mind. Did the little horn not replace the other 7 horns? Do SDAs not teach that the little horn
replace all of pagan Rome and made it into papal Rome? Do you not know that France, Italy, Spain, Austria, Germany and even
ruling families of Rome controlled the papacy?
…………………………
Marc: OK point taken, but Antiochus did not attack the truth of the sanctuary, papal Rome did, the prophecy said
truth was cast to the ground.
……………………………..
Russ: The Greeks were actually worse than the Babylonians and Persians because they attempted to convert the conquered
into adopting the Greek language and theology. They built a gymnasium near the Temple and corrupted the Jewish youth into
exercising in the nude, trying to cover up their circumcision and worshipping Greek gods.
…………………….
Marc: The problem with Antiochus is that he does not fit all the criteria which is not enough.
…………………………….
Russ: When see from the correct perspective of his affect on God's people, he fits the description perfectly. On
the other hand the papacy does not fit most of the description at all until it is blended with the papacy.
……………………………..
Marc: There may be a dual fulfilment, pagan Rome destroying the temple, papal Rome casting down the truth about
the heavenly temple. In any case Jesus saw a future fulfilment, which suggests it was not about Antiochus.
…………………………..
Russ: Jesus saw a future fulfilment which suggests that is was a TYPE of Antiochus. Are you denying that the Jews
saw any typology in Antiochus at all? That is absurd.
……………………….
Marc: According to the Hebrews the emphasis is on what happens at the end of the 2300 days.
…………………………….
Russ: Yes, at the END. Not to BEGIN at the end. The vision of Daniel 8 was to END at the end of the 2300 days.
SDA theology denies that.
…………………………….
Marc: What do you make of the judgment scene in Daniel 7:9-10 after which the saints inherit the kingdom, and Rev.
14:7 which says the judgment hour has come (in the present tense)?
………………………………..
Russ: The little horn is being judged in Daniel 7, n not the saints. You make a giant leap trying to connect this
to Leviticus 16. The judgment of antichrist in the last days will be immediately followed by God fulfilling his unconditional
promises to Israel on earth.
The "present tense" of Revelation 14:7 certainly has no connection to 1844. I believe that the entire book of Revelation
beyond chapter three will be fulfilled in the last days. On the other hand SDAs pick and choose what parts refer to the last
days.
…………………………..
Marc: The day for a year is only used in apocalyptic prophecies in Daniel and Revelation, they are prophecies which
span kingdoms, yet are short time periods given in symbolic language. Daniel does say that the 2300 years concerned the distant
future.
…………………………………
Russ: "Only used in apocalyptic prophecy" ---Now you are inventing your own principles of interpretation. Was the
40 years for 40 days in Numbers 14:34 "apocalyptic"? This is how you ignore that the one-day-Day of Atonement typology could
not last longer than one YEAR by using your own reckoning!
……………………..
Marc: chapter 9 speaks of the anointing of the heavenly sanctuary, chapter 8 of the cleansing of that sanctuary.
…………………………..
Russ: Daniel 9:24?
It could also refer to the anointing of the Messiah, or the Millennial Temple. However, if you are correct, then
you are admitting SDA error. It is completely logical that Christ anointed the heavenly sanctuary when he first ascended and
began his ministry there. If any part of the sanctuary is defiled and requires cleansing, then all of it is. If the entire
sanctuary was anointed then so also was the MHP instead of 1844. The text says MHP which doubly argues against your 1844 scenario.
You have destroyed your own argument.
……………………………..
Marc: It appears Daniel thought the
2300 days meant the exiles would not return after 70 years of Jeremiah he did not understand the vision. The 70 weeks begins
with a decree to rebuild Jerusalem but ends with the coming of the Messiah and the anointing of the heavenly sanctuary.
…………………………….
Russ: Again, if any part of the sanctuary is defiled, then all of it is defiled and none of it can be used. If
Jesus anointed the heavenly sanctuary at his ascension, then it did not need to be cleansed in 1844.
……………………………
Marc: This confirmed that the 2300 days did not mean the exile was cancelled or that some terrible disaster was
awaiting the people. There is no vision in chapter 9, the angels comes to give understanding about the vision previously given.
The wording is similar "understand" the "mareh" (applied to the 2300 days). The word for the whole vision is "hazon".
……………………………
Russ: If Daniel 9:24-27 ends
with Christ anointing the Most Holy Place at his ascension in AD30/33, then the vision of 8:1-14 must also end in AD 30/33.
How can your logic extend the vision to 1844 if you teach that it ends with Christ's ascension?
………………………………
Marc: there is a lot of very bad translation, when the Hebrews is clear why do people try to change it to fit their
theories? The Hebrews supports that the emphasis is on the end of the 2300 days.
Russ: The vision was to END at the END of the 2300 days. Why do you teach that the Day of Atonement only BEGAN
then and has already lasted 165 years?
Russ: C. If God had wanted us to connect it to the cleansing of the Day of Atonement, He would have surely used
the word TAHER. Almost ALL of the modern translations have it correct.
Marc: No because it had a wider meaning, it was doing more than cleansing, it also involves the vindication of
God.
Russ: The sanctuary of BC 515 was cleansed with a dedication. The sanctuary of BC 165 was cleansed with a re-dedication.
Neither were cleaned with a Day of Atonement cleansing. Your interpretation has no context in Daniel or otherwise.
Russ: What gives you the authority to insist on interpreting Daniel 8:14 as prophetic years?
Marc: If you reject this what are you left with, a prophecy that was never fulfilled! God's Word cannot fail.
Russ: Only if you reject the Antiochus scenario between 168 and 165 BC. Your prophecy will never be fulfilled because
the Presence of God cannot ever be defiled and require cleansing.
Marc: There is nothing to suggest the wicked can defile God's sanctuary except illegally …
Russ: You are definitely wrong on this point.
UN-ATONED SINS
DEFILED THE SANCTUARY ON EARTH
SDAs teach
that both the sanctuary on earth and also the one in heaven are defiled by sins which have already been confessed, atoned
by a sacrifice and pronounced forgiven. In reality these are the only sins committed
by OT believers which did not “defile” the sanctuary on earth. And the heavenly sanctuary cannot be defiled in
any manner.
Lev. 15:31 Thus shall you separate the children of Israel from their uncleanness that they do not
die in their uncleanness when they “defile my tabernacle” that is among
them.
Lev. 18:28 That the land does not spit you out also when you
“defile” it, as it spat out the nations that were before you.
Lev 20:3 And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people; because
he hath given of his seed unto Moloch, “to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name.
Numb. 5:2 Command the children of Israel that they put out of the camp every leper, and every one
that has an issue [of blood] and whosoever is “defiled” by the dead.
Numb. 5:3 Put out both male and female. Put them outside the camp “that they do not defile their camps” in the midst whereof I dwell.
