Questions on the Sanctuary.
By Uriah Smith
Our remarks on this subject last week closed with the argument that the throne of God itself is a living, moving throne, and its glory, by the express testimony of the prophet, is manifested in different apartments of his holy temple. When, therefore, Christ ascended to a position on the throne of his Father, on the right hand of God, he did not necessarily go into the most holy place of the sanctuary on high. To this we now add that in John's first view of the heavenly sanctuary, he saw the throne of God in the holy place. Rev. 4:1–6. Here John beheld, not Heaven opened, but a door opened in Heaven. And within the apartment opened before him, he saw a throne circled with the rainbow, and glowing like an emerald. The one seated upon the throne was the Father; for Christ is subsequently introduced as the one who took from his right hand the book sealed with seven seals. And before the throne there were seven lamps of fire, the antitype of the candlestick of the earthly sanctuary, which was placed in the first apartment. John's field of vision therefore, in this instance, lies in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary, and he there beholds the throne of God; and he sees the Father, the Son, the four and twenty elders, the four living creatures, and the innumerable company of angels acting together in reference to the salvation of man. Here, then, is positive proof that the first part of Christ's ministry before his Father was performed in the holy place. We find equal evidence that when the time comes for a change in the ministration from the holy to the most holy place, there is a change in the position of the Father. The opening of the work in the most holy place is undoubtedly described in Dan. 7:9, 10; and there we find this significant language: “I beheld till the thrones were cast down [placed] and the Ancient of days did sit.” The Ancient of days can be none other than God the Father. The expression that he “did sit,” shows that he here took a position which, in this work, he had not before occupied. In other words, he changed his position from the holy to the most holy place. He thus having changed his position, there is room for the fulfillment of verses 13 and 14, which represent Christ with his holy retinue as being brought into his presence to receive his kingdom, glory, and dominion. This certainly did not take place at the time of Christ's ascension; and there is no place to locate it, without supposing some such movement, as is here suggested, on the part of God. These conclusions are necessary; and as they are the only ones which will harmonize all the Scriptures on the point, we may rest with all confidence on their correctness. Our correspondent further inquires:— “Has the temple described in Ezekiel ever been built, or is it yet future? Have you thoughts on Ezekiel and Isaiah?” Reference we suppose is made to Eze. chapters 40–46. And we answer unhesitatingly that that sanctuary never has been built, and never will be built; for the promise of it was a conditional promise, and the children of Israel never having complied with the conditions, God could not stultify himself by fulfilling the promise over those violated conditions. It was offered to them on condition that they should be “ashamed” of their iniquities and put them away. Eze. 43:8–11. But Jeremiah in his prophetic history of their future perversity, captivity, and final overthrow, speaking with sad certainty of what would be, as though it had already been, says: “Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? Nay; they were not at all ashamed.” Jer. 6:15; 8:12. And this is shown in the fact that when the decree for Israel's restoration from captivity went forth, all would not go up to the land where God's abundant blessing was promised. Ezra 1:5; 7:7; 8:15; &c. But this prophecy does not belong to the future age: for Christ is to be the Prince and Shepherd over Israel in the glorified state. But in the prophecy it is a poor frail mortal, even offering a sin offering for himself. Eze. 45:22. Marriage and death are to be unknown in the age to come; but here are marriages, divorces, widows and death. Eze. 44:22. The prophet does not therefore refer to the age to come. This prophecy would have been fulfilled, had the conditions been complied with, in the Mosaic dispensation: for it was to be when circumcision, divorce, distinction in meats, offerings of beasts, the Jubilee and the Levitical priesthood were in force, as the chapters referred to testify. See this subject fully canvassed in “The Sanctuary,” by J. N. Andrews, second edition, pp. 62–66. We have no works on Ezekiel and Isaiah. The last question proposed is the following:— “What text implies that Christ will put off his priestly robes? Please answer in the Review, as I am not the only one interested. These doubts are suggested to all who hear the doctrine of the ‘Age to Come,’ and future probation, which we think are wrong.” To justify the expression that Christ will put off his priestly robes and array himself in kingly apparel when he comes, we refer to Rev. 1:13, and 19:13, 16. The first text represents him during this dispensation, in the midst of his churches, and holding their ministers in his right hand. Here he has on garments suitable to a priestly work, the priest's girdle being especially mentioned. See Ex. 29:9, &c. The second text unquestionably applies at the time of his second coming; and then he has on apparel not at all suited to the position of priest, but that of a king, as he is expressly called, “King of kings and Lord of lords.” Other scriptures referring to the same time represent him in a similar manner. Isa. 59:17; 63:1–4, &c. And these texts have a bearing upon that antiscriptural soul-destroying delusion referred to by our correspondent, namely the idea of probation after the coming of Christ. For when Christ's priesthood ends, and he no longer acts as mediator between God and the children of men, there can of course be no more offers of mercy and salvation to the unreclaimed. Then he that is filthy will be filthy still; Rev. 22:11; then there remaineth no more offering for sin; Heb. 10:14, 18; then it is forever decided who are blessed and holy and have part in the first resurrection: Rev. 20:6; and all the rest are consigned to the second death, which is the lake of fire and perdition of ungodly men. Rev. 20:5, 6, 15; 2 Pet. 3:7. He who can see probation for the ungodly in these declarations and events, must be as blind as the human imagination can conceive or Satan could desire. We would say to our correspondent that he does well to reject such a doctrine. And we would adjure those who are troubling the minds of investigators with these things to desist from their unholy work. Away with such vagaries from the system of present truth. In the name of reason and revelation we protest against them. They have no more business to be associated with the truths of the Sabbath and the third angel's message than a minister of sin would have to be stationed in the courts of glory. It is truly surprising that any who have investigated the system of present truth, should not be able to see that it is a system of divine harmony and unchangeable relation of parts. Each part is supported by, and each in its turn supports, all the rest. It is strange they should imagine that any point can be treated and adjusted without reference to the others. As is perhaps natural, the enemy of truth seems most persistent in trying to trouble and unsettle minds in reference to the sanctuary; for that is the citadel of our strength; and the special point of attack is the idea that the cleansing of the sanctuary began, by the entrance of Christ into the most holy place, at the end of the 2300 days in 1844. Hence his scheme to make men believe that Christ entered the most holy place when he ascended. Now it is easy to show that this position would utterly overthrow all the great lines of prophecy in the Bible. Let us try it on a few of them: If Christ entered the most holy place when he ascended, the cleansing of the sanctuary then commenced. Then the 2300 days at the end of which the sanctuary should be cleansed, terminated at the ascension of Christ. This would destroy at once the grand argument on the seventy weeks of Dan. 9, by which the first advent of the Messiah is demonstrated, and it destroys all the arguments by which it is shown that the decree to restore and build Jerusalem went forth 457 B. C. And inasmuch as the prophecies of Dan. chaps. 2, 7 and 8, are in their main features evidently parallel, and the 2300 days span very nearly the entire field of vision, if they terminated at the ascension of Christ, these lines of prophecy are crowded almost wholly back into the former dispensation, instead of reaching through this one to the end as they certainly do. So much for the prophecies of Daniel. By this view the four lines of the 2d, 7th, 8th and 9th chapters are utterly destroyed. Again, the message of the angel of Rev. 10, is based upon the prophetic periods of Daniel, and goes forth in connection with the close of the longest of them. If that ended at Christ's ascension, this message was given then. But this is the same as the message of Rev. 14:6, 7; which consequently locates that message at the same time. The 2300 days bring us to the sounding of the seventh trumpet. On the supposition that they ended at Christ's ascension, six of the seven trumpets are thrown back into the former dispensation. The finishing of the mystery of God, which then takes place, Rev. 10:7; 11:19, is the basis of the proclamation of the third angel, of Rev. 14:9–12, which is likewise thrown back to the opening of this dispensation. But this message warns against the mark of the beast enforced by the two-horned beast of the previous chapter, which is thus carried back over 1800 years from our time. This beast does his miracles in sight of the leopard beast mentioned before him, so back goes that beast to the Mosaic dispensation. As this beast continued 1260 years, and first received its seat from the dragon, away goes the dragon for at least 1260 years into the past dispensation, almost to the time of Moses. Who knows but Moses himself was the dragon after all! And further the seven last plagues, Rev. 16, are poured out upon those who received the mark of the beast against which the third angel warns them. They must have been poured out therefore away back somewhere near the opening of this dispensation, and must all be past; for they all fall upon the same generation. Compare verses 2 and 11. Then the battle of the great day has been fought, the great earthquake has transpired, the cities of the nations have fallen, every island has fled away, and the mountains have disappeared, and the voice from the temple has announced that it is finished; and for the past 15 to 18 centuries more or less, all has been over, the world drifting away beyond all the lines of God's prophecies, and his providence. To such stupid driveling absurdities are we driven the moment we take the position that Christ entered the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary when he ascended. We might speak of the converse of all these propositions and show that every argument by which our views on any of the lines of prophecy mentioned, are sustained, are direct evidences to show that the cleansing of the sanctuary did not commence till the end of the 2300 days in 1844; and whoever gives up this point, must be prepared to meet the arguments on all the others. So we might take up any other point with a like result. But this is sufficient. All that is needed is a broad and comprehensive view of the temple of truth, to see the stability of every pillar by which it is upheld.