Your ShelfYour Projects

BIBLE CLASS AT PORTLAND, MAINE

5%

Publishing Committee · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jan 27, 1859

FromReview and Herald, Vol. 13, No. 10.

Read the full edition

BIBLE CLASS AT PORTLAND, MAINE.

By John Norton Loughborough

[Bro. Loughborough sends us the following report of a Bible Class held in Portland, Me., accompanied with the following note: "The day after I had completed this report, I received the Review, containing Bro. White's report. I send it along however; do with it as you think proper." We give it that our readers may have the benefit of both. Ed.]
WHILE giving lectures on the Sanctuary and its cleansing, in the hall occupied by the Adventists associated with the Crisis, a request was made of us to meet with them in Bible Class. The subject they wished to investigate, was the Sanctuary and its cleansing. To their proposition we readily assented.
When the class assembled, the writer of this was chosen to lead the class. I supposed from previous experience in Bible Classes, that it would be the business of the leader to ask questions, and thus draw out the opinion of each member of the class. But I soon became convinced that I was to be the class, and the congregation were to question me.
Our great desire being to get light before the people, we did not object to this arrangement, although it appeared to me, somewhat awkward.
The form which the subject of the class assumed, was, "Are there two apartments in the heavenly Sanctuary, and are there two kinds of service performed in that Sanctuary?" I will refer in this report to some of the principal texts and arguments which came before the class.
It was first suggested that Heb. ix, 23, 24 proved the existence of more than one holy place in heaven: "It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us."
On this text it was claimed that as the statement is made that "Christ is not entered into the holy places," (plural,) it must be that "the true" is also plural, and refers to more than one holy place, as Macknight's translation clearly states: "Christ hath not entered into the holy places made with hands, the images of the true holy places; but into heaven itself," &c.
Our Crisis friends claimed that this text simply taught that the earthly tabernacle was a figure of heaven itself, and that "the true" refers to one holy place in the heavens, in which Christ ministers accomplishing but one kind of service. We then asked if they wished to be understood that the two apartments on earth both met their antitype in the one apartment in heaven? This position they would not take; but in some remarks left us to infer (which we learn is their true position,) that the anti-type of the first apartment is not in heaven but on earth, and that Christ is only fulfilling the typical high priest's work. It was claimed that the high priest never ministered in the first apartment of the sanctuary, but only in the most holy place.
Our claim was that all the service which was accomplished in either apartment of the sanctuary was either directly the service of the high priest, or else accomplished under his superintendence. The service of the sanctuary was all the service of the high priest, although the work in the first apartment might in reality have been accomplished by those priests under him, who served in the order of their course.
To sustain the position that Christ performed but one kind of service, and that in the holiest, and that that service commenced when Christ ascended, Heb. ix, 19, was quoted. "Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus." From this text it was claimed that Christ must have been performing his service in the anti-typical most holy place when Paul wrote to the Hebrews, or else he could not say "we have boldness to enter the holiest." At this point Bro. White introduced some criticisms on the term "holiest," showing that in the original Greek, the word rendered holiest, was in the plural, and should be rendered holies. He also introduced Macknight's translation of this text: "Well then, brethren, having boldness in the entrance of the holy places by the blood of Jesus." "Well," said one, "I don't know whether it is so or not; men have disputed our translation to sustain a great many notions." Said another, "I am not going to give up my Bible."
At this point we proposed the following question: If only the high priest's work in the most holy prefigures the work of Christ, what is represented by the service in the first apartment? "Well," says one, "the service in the first apartment was only a work preparatory to an atonement being made." Those priests, it was claimed, were not mediators, only the high priest was mediator. Thus they presented us with the idea that the people were three hundred and sixty-four days without a mediation. Another referred to 1 Pet. ii, 5, as an answer to the question, what is the antitype of the work in the first apartment?"Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ." Our reply to this text was, that in the work of the first apartment of the sanctuary, blood was offered; but this text says nothing about offering blood. The text quoted, speaks of offering sacrifices. This we showed was not the service of the first apartment; but the sacrifices were offered on the altar of sacrifices which was placed in the court just before the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. See Ex. xl, 6. Again the demand was made for evidence to prove that a work is performed by the church on earth according with that accomplished by the priest in the first apartment of the earthly sanctuary. That work we showed was an offering of blood, and called for evidence to prove that the church thus made an offering of blood. No such testimony was presented. The reason is, no such testimony exists.
At this point, Heb. vi, 19, 20, was quoted to show that Christ was performing his work in the holiest apartment of the new covenant Sanctuary, when Paul wrote to the Hebrews. "Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the vail: whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest forever after the order of Melchisedec." The argument based on this text was, that there was but one vail in the typical sanctuary, and that was between the first and second apartments. And as Christ was said to be within the vail, it must be that he was in the most holy of the antitypical Sanctuary. We objected to this, that Paul taught, [Heb. ix, 2, 3,] that there were two vails in the typical sanctuary. "For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shew-bread; which is called the sanctuary. (Margin, holy.) And after the second vail, the tabernacle, which is called the holiest of all." It is apparent to every candid reader, that there could not be a second without a first. So we claimed if the sanctuary had a second vail, it must have had two vails. So the fact that Christ was within the vail in the days of Paul would not prove that he was within the second apartment.
Our friends who were contending that Christ was in the holiest when Paul wrote, thought this statement of Paul's concerning the second vail, must be a wrong translation, or a misprint. We asked their authority for claiming that it was a wrong translation; but no such evidence was presented, save their statement that the earthly sanctuary had but one vail. These proved to be the same individuals who a few moments before had declared their intention to stick to their Bibles.
An effort was made to draw out the true position of these persons on the Sanctuary question; but the questions proposed for this purpose they carefully evaded. Their true position we have since learned to be, that the new-covenant Sanctuary is both heaven and earth; that while the service of the first apartment is being carried out by men on earth, Christ is fulfilling the service of the most holy in heaven; and that the blue sky is the vail between the two apartments.
By them it was claimed, that when we read "Unto two thousand three hundred days then shall the Sanctuary be cleansed," it means that at the termination of that period Christ's work will be completed, and the atonement for sinners be ended. This conclusion might perhaps be drawn, if the text said, "Then the Sanctuary shall have been cleansed;" but I cannot see how such a conclusion can be drawn from our present version of the text.
Were we to admit the view noticed above, that Christ performs the work of the holiest in heaven, while men on earth are fulfilling the service of the first apartment, then we could no longer claim that there was analogy between the work in the typical, and that accomplished in the antitypical Sanctuary; for there was to be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation while the high priest went into the second apartment to fulfill his work there, and make an atonement. See Lev. xvi, 17. So if the position were true that the service of the second apartment commenced when Christ ascended, then no first apartment service has yet been accomplished; for there was (in the type) no service in the first apartment while the high priest was accomplishing his service in the most holy place. But the service in the most holy place cleanses the Sanctuary, (which is the high priest's service) and carries us to the end of probation for sinners. The above positions being admitted, there never would be a first apartment service. But we learn that the priests on earth "served unto an example of heavenly things." Heb. viii, 5. Then the service of both apartments was an example, and there must be a service in heaven, answering to the first apartment service on earth.
As the Sanctuary is not said to be a pattern of things in earth and heaven, but "patterns of things in heaven," [Heb. ix, 23,] both apartments of the antitypical Sanctuary must be in heaven. If the blue sky which surrounds the earth is the vail of the Sanctuary, of course heaven must be the outer apartment, and the earth being entirely surrounded by the vail, (blue sky,) would be more properly called that within the vail.
J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH.
Monterey, Mich., Jan. 12th, 1859.