|
What is the foundation of your faith?" If
asked that question, a Seventh-day Adventist today might respond, "Jesus
Christ, of course!" or "The Bible," or even "Our special lifestyle." But our
earliest pioneers would no doubt declare, "The sanctuary and the 2300 days!"
Thus, Ellen G. White said in 1906, "The
correct understanding of the ministration in the heavenly sanctuary is the
foundation of our faith."1 Years before she had called the heavenly
sanctuary "the very center of Christ's work in behalf of men" and had warned
that an understanding of Christ's sanctuary ministry is so vital that those
who fail to obtain it will be unable "to exercise the faith which is
essential at this time, or to occupy the position which God designs them to
fill."2
Why is that so? And what is the "correct
understanding" of the heavenly sanctuary?
Millerite Adventist understanding
Before the great disappointment of
October 22, 1844, the Millerite Adventist understanding of Christ's ministry
in the heavenly sanctuary included the belief, held by many other
Christians, that Jesus our high priest began His antitypical day of
atonement ministry in the Most Holy place upon His ascension to heaven.
Unlike other Christians, they believed that He would complete His day of
atonement ministry and leave the heavenly sanctuary at the end of the 2300
days, in or around 1844. And some of them, led by the Methodist expositor
Josiah Litch, believed as early as 1841 that the judgment of Daniel 7 was
commencing prior to the Second Coming. They called this judgment the "trial"
and said it was separating the righteous from the wicked and determining who
would be resurrected at the "execution" of the judgment at the Second
Coming.3
Although the Millerite Adventists knew
that Jesus was currently in the heavenly sanctuary, they did not understand
that the heavenly sanctuary would be "cleansed" in fulfillment of Daniel
8:14. They interpreted the sanctuary of Daniel 8 as the church on earth and
also as the earth itself, and said that both would be cleansed at the Second
Coming. The cleansing of the church, according to William Miller and most of
his followers, was a cleansing from all sin and apostasy. That the margin in
Miller's Bible offered "justified" as a synonym for "cleansed" confirmed
Miller in his anticipation of this spiritual cleansing. As for the earth, it
would be cleansed by fire.
Post-disappointment understanding
Failure of the October 22, 1844,
expectation led to intensive reexamination of the Bible and with it the
discovery of additional insights so pertinent that instead of being the end
of Adventism, 1844 became viewed as a landmark in salvation history and a
most prominent sign of the certainty and nearness of Christ's second advent.
Leaders in this early investigation were Hiram Edson, Joseph Bates, and
James and Ellen White, who became founders of the Seventh-day Adventist
Church. Others such as O. R. L. Crosier chose not to stay with the group
that later became Seventh-day Adventists.
A real heavenly sanctuary
Helpful insights came in studying
biblical typology, analyzing Christ's New Testament priesthood as
antitypical of two orders of Old Testament priesthood. Christ's ordination
under the Melchizedek priesthood authorized Him to function legally as a
heavenly high priest (Heb.7), while the Aaronic/Levitical priesthood
revealed the pattern of His heavenly priesthood (Heb. 8-10).
From these typologies our pioneers
discovered further that as the Old Testament Aaronic priests ministered
within a sanctuary (a tabernacle or a temple), so Christ, the high priest of
the new covenant, ministers in a true heavenly sanctuary, one that "God
pitched and not man," the sanctuary of which the Levitical sanctuary on
earth was a copy (see Ex.25:8,9, 40; Heb.8:2,5; 9:24).
To their surprise they saw that, contrary
to their previous notions and to general Christian opinion, the Book of
Hebrews does not teach that Christ entered the Most Holy Place at the time
of His ascension. Hebrews says literally that when Christ went to heaven He
entered the "holy places," meaning simply "the heavenly sanctuary." The
Greek text of Hebrews clearly gives the plural, "holy places," fully
supporting the presence of a two-apartment sanctuary in heaven. Thus, the
New Testament was seen to affirm that like the earthly sanctuary, which had
a holy place and a Most Holy Place, so the heavenly sanctuary also has two
apartments.4
The pioneers concluded, in harmony with
biblical typology, that as the first phase of the earthly priestly
ministry&emdash;the daily&emdash;transpired in the holy place, so the first
phase of Christ's heavenly ministry was performed in the holy place of the
heavenly sanctuary, not in the Most Holy Place as they had formerly
believed. They also discovered that just as the second phase of the Old
Testament sanctuary services&emdash;the yearly, or Day of
Atonement&emdash;took place in the earthly most holy place, so the antitype
of this service would be fulfilled by Christ's cleansing of the sanctuary in
heaven's Most Holy Place just before the Second Advent. This involved the
astonishing discovery that the heavenly sanctuary itself would need
cleansing&emdash;a truth plainly taught in Hebrews 9:23. This cleansing
would not be by the blood of animals, like the earthly sanctuary, or by
fire, like the earth, but by the blood of Christ Himself.
These new insights, derived from Exodus,
Leviticus, Daniel, Malachi, and Hebrews, led the Adventist pioneers to the
conclusion that the end of the 2300 years in 1844 was not the second coming
of their Saviour, but the beginning of the most significant new era in the
plan of salvation: the entering of Christ into His second and final phase of
high priestly ministry, the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary on the
antitypical Day of Atonement. At this time Christ "came to the Ancient of
days" (Dan. 7:13) to commence a judgment, investigative in nature&emdash;the
first phase of the final judgment.
Cleansing the sanctuary on two levels
As noted, the Millerite Adventists saw
the Daniel 8:14 cleansing of the sanctuary as meeting fulfillment on two
levels: cleansing the church from sin, and cleansing the earth by fire.
After 1844, faithful Adventists continued to maintain the concept of a dual
cleansing, but now it no longer included the cleansing of the earth.
Instead, the cleansing pertained to the heavenly sanctuary and the church.
This new understanding was fully in harmony with the Day of Atonement
services, when the people were required to "afflict themselves," to engage
in soul-searching, or be judged and cut off (see Lev. 16; 23). The
realization that Christ has begun His final ministry on the antitypical Day
of Atonement had a profound impact on the believers.
In the Day-Star for April 18,1846, two
months after the famous sanctuary article appeared in the Day-Star Extra of
February 7, O. L. R. Crosier referred to a perfect harmony between
activities currently going on in heaven and on earth. "There is," he wrote,
"a literal and a spiritual temple&emdash;the literal being the sanctuary in
New Jerusalem (literal city), and the spiritual the church&emdash;the
literal occupied by Jesus Christ, our King and Priest (John 14:2, Heb.8:2;
9:11); the spiritual by the Holy Ghost (I Cor.3:17; 6:19, Eph. 2:20-22).
Between these two there is a perfect concert of action, as Christ prepares
the place the Spirit does the people. When He came to His temple, the
sanctuary, to cleanse it; the Spirit commenced the special cleansing of the
people (Mal.3:1 -3)."
This special work of personal
purification was to prepare the believer to pass successfully the
investigative judgment before the Second Advent. This insight was fully
endorsed by the Sabbatarian Adventist pioneers like Joseph Bates, James and
Ellen White, J. N. Andrews, Hiram Edson, and Uriah Smith.
The need for a purification of God's
people received strong endorsement from the understanding of the second
angel's message that Adventists had developed in 1843, when they began to
experience persecution. The message forcefully announced the fall of
Babylon, implying that God's true people must separate themselves from its
apostate influence.
Reforms in beliefs and behavior
The quest for Bible-based doctrine_led
Seventh-day Adventist pioneers to adopt several reforms in belief and
practice in contrast to the established churches. These reforms included,
most notably, worship on the seventh-day Sabbath instead of Sunday.
Attention to Christ's Day of Atonement ministry led to an awareness of
Revelation 11:19: "The temple of God was opened in heaven, and the ark of
his covenant was seen'' (NKJV), and this in turn directed their attention to
the Sabbath commandment. They saw Jesus now in the Most Holy Place,
spotlighting the Sabbath as being still the sign of God's everlasting
covenant. The new light on the sanctuary suddenly made Sabbath reform
relevant! This quest for Bible-based doctrines led to other reforms, such as
(1) baptism by immersion; (2) tithes and offerings; (3) living healthfully
to prepare believers physically, mentally, and spiritually for the Second
Advent (I Thess. 5:23); (4) following a Christlike lifestyle characterized
by simplicity, without jewelry and cosmetics (I Peter 3:3, 4); (5) believing
that only through the faith of Jesus (Rev. 14:12) can believers be fully
partakers of His righteousness, receiving forgiveness of sins, power to live
a victorious life, and the full assurance of salvation.
The significance of the sanctuary
These Bible-based discoveries transformed
a seemingly defeated group of enthusiasts into an irresistible army of
evangelists propelled by a most glorious mission mandate: the proclamation
of the last message of mercy that was to enlighten the whole world with the
light of Christ in preparation for the Second Advent (see Rev. 18:1).
Key to the disappointment. "The subject
of the sanctuary was the key which unlocked the mystery of the
disappointment of 1844. It opened to view a complete system of truth,
connected and harmonious, showing that God's hand had directed the great
advent movement and revealing present duty as it brought to light the
position and work of His people.... Light from the sanctuary illumined the
past, the present, and the future."5
Foundation of our faith. "The correct
understanding of the ministration in the heavenly sanctuary is the
foundation of our faith."6
Essential to true faith. "The subject of
the sanctuary and the investigative judgment should be clearly understood by
the people of God. All need a knowledge for themselves of the position and
work of their great High Priest. Otherwise it will be impossible for them to
exercise the faith which is essential at this time or to occupy the position
which God designs them to fill.... The sanctuary in heaven is the very
center of Christ's work in behalf of men."7
Endorsed by the Holy Spirit. "As the
great pillars of our faith have been presented, the Holy Spirit has borne
witness to them, and especially is this so regarding the truths of the
sanctuary question. Over and over again the Holy Spirit has in a marked
manner endorsed the preaching of this doctrine."8
Neglecting the earthly dimension
Throughout the history of Seventh-day
Adventists various views have been advocated that have distorted the
biblical view of the sanctuary. Some advocates of distorted ideas failed to
accept the cleansing of the church as integral to the sanctuary doctrine
(the "earthly dimension").
Leaders in the 1880s, for instance, were
able to give thorough Bible studies on the intricacies of the investigative
judgment. They developed skills in debating as a form of evangelism, making
them successful in winning doctrinal arguments. But they said too little
about the cross as the supreme revelation of Christ's unmeasurable,
self-sacrificial love and of His ongoing grace and power to help us
sacrifice ourselves in the service of others. How are we to explain this
neglect?
There also was a decline from the
historic stand of the pioneers to make the Bible the norm of both faith and
practice. Members were inclined to follow church leaders rather than shape
their convictions by personal Bible study.
Additionally, church leaders of the 1880s
generally failed to understand the practical implications of Christ's death
and His day of atonement ministry. Sensing only slightly the need for
"afflicting their souls," and seeking the experiential "blotting out of
sin," believers did not experience as they should the impartation of His
righteousness.
Beyond that, attempts to correct the
condition of the church met strong opposition. The majority of the leaders
did not welcome and in fact disregarded the testimony of Jesus through the
ministry of Ellen White.
Neglecting the earthly dimension of the
antitypical day of atonement profoundly affected the spiritual condition of
the church, the lifestyle of believers, and the impact of their witness on
nonmembers. Emphasis on Christless doctrines led to the publication of
doctrinal differences, fueling a climate of disunity and party spirit.
Distrust and envy pervaded the church and was manifested in loveless and
inhuman behavior, character assassination, and abundant gossip.
Instead of following God's counsels to
complete the mission He had assigned to the remnant, leadership adopted
human strategies that coupled with Christless emphasis on the law, created
an unfavorable impression of legalism on nonmembers.
Neglecting the heavenly dimension
During the early 1900s Dr. J. H.
Kellogg's pantheism "spiritualized" away the existence of a real heavenly
sanctuary. His view that God's presence permeates everything made Christ's
ministry in a particular place irrelevant. Social involvement in medical and
humanitarian work of a nondenominational nature replaced the practice of
spiritual self-examination, the affliction of soul to meet the coming Lord.
It also preempted the need to proclaim the distinctive prophetic truths of
the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
The theological consequences of this
spiritualizing of the sanctuary doctrine led to denial of both Christ's
investigative judgment work and of His special work of cleansing His people.
Inevitably came the conclusion that nothing at all happened in 1844.
With these denials came a muting of the
sense of urgency. Prophetic preaching declined, and indifference marked our
attitude toward our unique landmark doctrines. Present truth was redefined
in terms of preoccupation with the social and humanitarian dimensions of the
gospel at the expense of living in anticipation of Christ's soon return.
Ellen White called Kellogg's
spiritualization of heavenly realities the "alpha" of apostasy and warned
that an even worse "omega" was soon to follow.
Current distortions
A majority of Seventh-day Adventists
continue to base their understanding of the sanctuary on the Bible. They
have concluded that the pioneer discoveries of the present truth have shed
great light on Christ's intercessory ministry in their behalf.
In some parts of the world, however, we
see a continuation of the earlier "spiritualizing" trend. A flood of new
Bible translations aids this process, for most new translations do not use
"cleansed" in Daniel 8:14, but prefer "restored to its rightful state" or
"emerge victorious," and so on. Because these terms do not readily call to
mind Day of Atonement imagery, some people have downplayed or given up the
idea that the passage refers to the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary.
However, such is the richness of the Hebrew verb in Daniel 8:14, that it is
possible to see the intimate association of the cleansing of the sanctuary
with the restoration of the sanctuary truth and the victorious rise of God's
remnant people.
Saddest of all, perhaps, the
spiritualization of the sanctuary deprives people of harmoniously
cooperating on earth in the final work our Saviour is currently performing
during the "hour of God's judgment." Often sanctuary discussions become
arguments when they should unite us like no other doctrine.
Downsizing the sanctuary doctrine. Other
contemporary attempts to interpret the sanctuary can be characterized as
downsizing the doctrine. Recently, for example, one minister9 remarked that
if you can make sense out of the Seventh-day Adventist fundamental belief
statement on the sanctuary doctrine, congratulations. To him the sanctuary
has little practical relevance. Its investigative judgment aspect, he says,
has been a stumbling block for many young Seventh-day Adventists,
undermining the gospel and promoting perfectionism, legalism, guilt, and in
relation to the time of trouble, a religion of fear and arrogance. Our
presentation of Christ's sanctuary ministry, this minister insists, should
be limited to His role as Intercessor, a role that involves participation in
human suffering, taking on Himself our diseases (including AIDS). As Christ
suffered with sufferers and intercedes for them, so Seventh-day Adventists
should also alleviate human suffering.
In response, we can certainly agree on
the importance of Christ's work as Intercessor. Adventists, indeed, have
already incorporated its various dimensions into the fundamental beliefs
dealing with Christ's role, work, and ministry (see numbers 2, 9, and 10).
Christ's identification with suffering humanity may not have been stressed
everywhere as it should have been, but this does not mean that we should
downplay the progressive understanding of the heavenly sanctuary discovered
through Bible study in the years following 1844.
The insights gained in 1844 constitute a
part of present truth that continues to be relevant, seeing it calls the
attention of the world to the arrival of the judgment hour and to the urgent
need to participate with Christ in overcoming every sin. Regressing to the
pre-1844 sanctuary view that confined Christ's ministry to only that of
Intercessor is a serious neglect of present truth. It is a distortion of the
gospel proclamation foreseen for our time in the three angels' messages of
Revelation 14:6-12. And it provides a false gospel of false assurance in
that it fails to tell people what will happen if they reject Christ's final
offer of overcoming grace.
Negative feelings toward the sanctuary
doctrine are not solved by downsizing it. Now, as never before, there is a
need for a deep study of the Scriptures. Our pioneers arrived at their
insights through thorough Bible study, under the guidance of the Holy
Spirit. Similarly, Seventh-day Adventists today need deep Bible study,
observing correct principles of Bible interpretation and guided by the
Spirit.
It is true that this doctrine has been
misused, but is that a reason to discard it? Because some people overeat the
healthiest food and develop serious diseases, shall we discard healthy
foods? Because some people keep the Sabbath legalistically, shall we give up
all Sabbath observance? Misuse of the sanctuary doctrine does not justify
stripping it of its splendid progressive light.
In my own life it has brought joy knowing
that daily my Saviour intercedes for me, my family, my church, and the
world. It has also brought urgency, knowing that the final judgment is now
in progress and that God is eager for me to "afflict my soul" and overcome
all sin. In response to His law as well as to His ongoing grace, I give
myself daily in total dedication to sharing the good news of the cleansing
of the sanctuary. Its proper and balanced understanding brings no fear, but
abiding assurance and strength. I believe that as I cooperate with His power
and grace in overcoming sin, my destiny is secure. The work of my High
Priest and Judge in the sanctuary has strengthened my confidence in Him as
has nothing else.
"Pre-Advent" instead of "investigative."
Although "pre-Advent judgment" is justifiable, use of it as an intentional
replacement for "investigative judgment" is motivated by a desire to
downplay the nature of the judgment. In many cases it implies a rejection of
the special cleansing of the soul temple, preferring to emphasize instead
the legal, or forensic, aspect of judgment without integrating the personal
experience of believers, the essential "affliction of soul" of every
believer (Lev. 23:29). Sometimes pre-Advent is used to distance the judgment
from 1844, implying that there will be a judgment before the second Coming,
but no one knows when.
Often associated with the preference for
pre-advent is the view that the judgment is unqualified good news.
Admittedly, in the past some Adventists have worried unduly about the
investigative judgment, their cases pending before the judgment bar. Today
many feel that any worry is unhealthy, inhibiting the joy of believers. The
judgment, they say, is nothing but good news.
But doesn't the truth lie somewhere
between these extremes? It may be helpful to remember that this judgment is
not good news for the little horn of Daniel 7, an entity made up of
professed Christians who claim to love and follow Jesus. Their sincere
convictions are no excuse for their unChristlike persecuting behavior. The
investigative judgment portrayed in Daniel 7 reveals to the universe who the
true heirs of the kingdom are (see especially verses 21, 22).
Preoccupation with cleansing without
faith. An emphasis on cleansing the soul temple without the faith of Jesus
is as unhealthy as preoccupation with unwarranted assurance. Those who are
preoccupied with the quest for a perfectly sinless lifestyle in preparation
for the Second Advent without an awareness that from a human perspective
such a goal is impossible are engaged in an exercise of futility. A major
lesson of 1888 was I that it is only through the imparted faith of Jesus as
a result of total surrender that a Christlike life can be realized. The
practical results of a healthy view of the sanctuary doctrine for the church
today bring the | full participation of believers into the final
compassionate outreach that will enlighten the whole world and usher in the
coming of the Lord.
The greatest threat. The greatest danger
to the sanctuary doctrine is indifference resulting from failure to see its
relevance and practicality. The first step toward reaching a balanced
interpretation of the sanctuary doctrine is to study the whole scriptural
counsel, studying every relevant passage in its context. The true
interpretation will be centered on Christ. Every sanctuary-related passage
should be studied from the viewpoint of what it teaches about the
preciousness of Jesus and what He has done and is doing for us. Otherwise,
the doctrine will not be able to exert its proper inspiring and transforming
influence, rendering it "irrelevant."
The true interpretation will retain the
two-dimensional, or two-level, understanding of Christ's day of atonement
ministry on earth today as well as in heaven. It will see His work as
associated intimately with grace, forgiveness, and the blotting out of sins
in the heavenly sanctuary. Proper emphasis on this ministration of the
Lamb's blood in heaven will lead sinners to repentance. God provides the
abundant grace to lead sinners to repentance and believers to a daily
deepening work of repentance and commitment. Thus the believer experiences
both justification and sanctification.
This process involves (1) belief in Jesus
and His saving work as our personal intercessor in the heavenly sanctuary,
and (2) reconciliation to God, which means entering into a dynamic covenant
relationship with Christ our high priest. It means a work of confession,
repentance, consecration, and restitution. Those who are truly reconciled to
God will respond by making things right with those they have offended and by
loving their enemies.
Restoring the sanctuary truth
Proclamation of the sanctuary truth i
fully restores the biblical harmony between God's plan of salvation as
portrayed in both the Old and New Testaments, a harmony that fell into
disregard as a result of the apostasy of the "man of lawlessness." As such,
the role of the remnant, brought into existence in 1844 to make this
proclamation, becomes significant.
A balanced understanding of the sanctuary
doctrine involves cooperation with Christ's mission to the world. Failure of
believers to be service-oriented results mainly from viewing the doctrine
incorrectly and neglecting its import in daily experience. What is needed,
therefore, is not a downsizing of the doctrine, but a fuller and more
balanced view of Christ and His sanctuary ministry through a deep study of
the Word, under the guidance of the Spirit. This will lead to following the
Lamb wherever He leads.
The essence of the sanctuary doctrine is
its unique revelation of Christ's ministry of reconciliation for and in us,
enabling us to experience His love, which we can share with others in
unselfish and sacrificial service so they see a genuine revelation of Jesus
as the only hope for humanity. It embraces our mental, spiritual, and
physical attributes, and is designed to transform sinners into victorious
people who are patiently yet actively awaiting the coming of their Saviour.
"Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the
commandments of God and the faith of Jesus" (Rev. 14:12, NKJV).
1 Ellen G. White, Evangelism
(Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Pub. Assn., 1946), p. 221.
2 The Great Controversy (Mountain
View, CA: Pacific Press Pub. Assn., 1911), p. 488.
3 See Josiah Litch, An Address to the
Public (Boston, 1841), p. 37; The Prophetic Expositions
(Boston, 1842), 1:50-54; A. Hale,
Herald of Bridegroom! (Boston, 1843), pp. 22-24; Midnight Cry,
Oct. 13, 1844.
4 See O. R. L. Crosier, "The Law of
Moses," Day-Star Extra Feb. 7, 1846.
5 -----, The Great Controversy, p.
423.
6 -----, Evangelism, p. 221.
7 -----, The Great Controversy, p.
488.
8 -----, Evangelism, p. 224.
9 Steve Daily, Adventism for a New
Generation (Portland, OR: Better Living Publishers, 1993), pp. 160-167. |
Top