The Instigator
daley
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Briannj17
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

SDA Doctrines about the year 1844, the Heavenly Sanctuary and Investigative Judgement are Unbiblical

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/11/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,363 times Debate No: 89494
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (23)
Votes (0)

 

daley

Pro

Opening round is for acceptance only.

My opponent my be a Seventh-day Adventist

Second round for opening arguments, and all other rounds for rebuttals and counter rebuttals
Briannj17

Con

I accept and am eager to hear what you have to say.
Debate Round No. 1
daley

Pro

The SDA church says: The prophecy of the 70 weeks suppliments the vision of the 2,300 years; in fact, it provides the starting point (457 BC)".The 2, 300 days ended in 1844." (Great Apocalyptic Prophecies, p.44) "The phrase "for two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings" (NRSV) defines the entire period that cover the fulfillment of the vision of the ram, the goat, and the little horn"" (p.3) This means that that they believe the vision of the ram, the goat and the little horn begins in 457 BC. Without this start date for the vision, their 1844 date falls apart.

Daniel says he say a ram with two horns, and explains the two horns to mean the kings of Media and Persia. (Dan 8:3, 20) "The two horns were high, but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last." (Dan 8:3) The taller horn that came up later is the Persians. At first the Medes were dominant, but in 550 B.C.E., Cyrus the ruler of Persia gained an easy victory over Median King Astyages. Cyrus combined their peoples, laws and customs to make it a dual empire. Proof:
"In 553, Cyrus the Great, King of Persia, rebelled against his grandfather, the Mede King, Astyages son of Cyaxares; he finally won a decisive victory in 550 BC resulting in Astyages" capture by his own dissatisfied nobles, who promptly turned him over to the triumplant Cyrus." (From Cyrus to Alexander: A History of the Persian Empire, Pierre Briant, 2006, p.31; also see Wikipedia " Achaemenid Empire https://en.wikipedia.org...) So, the vision begins as early as 550 BC, long before the 457 start date the SDA church claims. Counting 2,300 years from 550 BC doesn"t bring us to 1844, so this date is based on false information. In fact, Daniel 8:4 has the ram pushing in three directions, west, north and south, which again takes place before 457 BC.

Further, the 70 weeks couldn"t be part of the 2,300 days because Daniel 8 which relates the vision of the 2,300 days doesn"t mention the 70 weeks or any events of Daniel 9, and Daniel 9 where we have the prophecy of the 70 weeks doesn"t mention the 2,300 days, the ram, the goat or the little horn. So there is no connection.

SDAs claim that Daniel 8:14 is talking about 2,300 years, but it says "evenings and mornings" the usual term for literal days. Further, nothing is said in Daniel 8 about "years," it"s the assumption of SDAs that since a day equals in year in two specific Bible prophecies, that this forms a rule for interpreting "all" time prophecy with a day-for-a-year rule. However, this is not a rule for interpreting prophecy. Jesus prophecies that he would be dead for three days, and it didn"t mean three years in that prophecy; God prophecies to Noah that in 7 days more it would rain 40 days, and this didn"t mean in 7 years more it will rain 40 years, so it"s not true that a day always equals in year in Bible prophecy. A day equals in year when the specific prophecy says so, but the prophecy in Daniel 8 doesn"t say so. (Mark 9:31; Gen 7:4)

SDAs also say: "In 1844 Christ then entered the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary, to perform the closing work of atonement, preparatory to His coming" (The Great Controversy, page 481)

This doctrine holds that Jesus ministered in the holy for 1800 years before entering the Most Holy in 1844. Hebrews 9:24 says that Jesus entered the presence of God at his ascension. Leviticus 16:2, 13; Exodus 25:21, 22; 30:6 and Numbers 7:89 show that God's presence has always been in the Most Holy. So for Christ to enter God's presence in the 1st century C.E., he had to be in the Most Holy. Even the SDA church admits that the "Most Holy Place of the sanctuary, which represented God's own dwelling place." (Pillars of Our Faith, 2001, p.19) To get out of this, SDAs would have to claim that the Father, and his throne, were in the holy place for 1800 before 1844. But this leads to the ridiculous assertion, that an entirely empty room was Most Holy, more holy than the room where the throne of God was with the Father and Son sitting thereon for 1800 years.

Also, the claim that the anti-typical day of atonement began in 1844 doesn't even fit the type, because the Lord's goat was not sacrificed until the Day of Atonement, showing that Christ's death on the cross was within the antitypical day of atonement. But the SDAs have reverse the type, having the first aspect of the Day of Atonement ritual - the sacrifice of the Lord's goat on the cross - then to have him do yearly service in the holy for 1800 years, before returning to the Day of Atonement in 1844. Question: if Jesus' death is the sacrifice of the Lord's goat, shouldn't this take place during the Day of Atonement and not the yearly aspect?

"Attended by heavenly angels, our great High Priest enters the holy of holies, and there appears in the presence of God, to engage in the last acts of His ministration in behalf of man - to perform the work of investigative judgment, and to make an atonement for all who are shown to be entitled to its benefits." (The Great Controversy, 1950 edition, page 480).

The atonement was complete at the cross, for believers were already fully justified, redeemed and reconciled to God (which is what atonement means) long before 1844, according to Romans 5:1, 9-11; 3:21-25; 1 John 1:7; Ephesians 1:7 and Hebrews 9:12, 24-26. Even Ellen White in The Desire of Ages p.790 says "God himself heard the assurance that His atonement for the sins of man had been AMPLE." So Jesus' sacrifice wasn't missing anything. It was enough to atone for our sins.

SDAs teach that: "At the time appointed for the judgment "the close of the 2300 days, in 1844" began the work of investigation and blotting out of sins." (The Great Controversy, 1950 edition, page 486) So sins were not blotted out before 1844? They also say: "This work of examination of character, of determining who are prepared for the kingdom of God, is that of the investigative judgment" (The Great Controversy (p. 489, 1939 Ed.) (p. 428, p.1950 Ed.)

Did Jesus need the 1844 Investigative Judgment for the purpose of "determining who are prepared for the kingdom of God"? The Bible tells us that Jesus already knew who are prepared for his kingdom. (2 Tim 2:19) Jesus said in John 10:14 way back in the first century, "I know my sheep". According to SDAs, he should have said, I will not know my sheep until after 1844. Jesus told the apostles that when he sat on his throne, they would be worthy of judging the twelve tribes. (Matt 19:28) They did not have to wait till 1844 to see if they passed the Investigative Judgment test to see if they could judge the twelve tribes. In 2 Timothy 4:7-8 Paul knows he is safe before 1844. Hebrews 11 gives a long list of witnesses from Abel down through history who found favor with God before 1844; they we sure of their salvation already.

SDAs say: "As the books of record are opened in the judgment, the lives of all who have believed on Jesus come in review before God. Beginning with those who first lived upon the earth, our Advocate presents the cases of each successive generation, and closes with the living. Every name is mentioned, every case closely investigated. Names are accepted, names rejected" (The Great Controversy, 1950 edition, page 483).

According to them all the names of the people who first lived upon the earth that believed in Jesus will kickoff the 1844 Investigative Judgment to see if they are worthy, then after that God will start judging the living.

Abel: Heb 11:4 (NIV) By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was commended as a righteous man, when God spoke well of his offerings. And by faith he still speaks, even though he is dead.

God called Abel "a righteous man". Now is God going to send Abel through the 1844 I J to check to make sure he did not made a mistake in calling him a righteous man?

Enoch: Heb 11:4-5 (NIV) By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death; he could not be found, because God had taken him away. For before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God.

Enoch was "commended as one who pleased God." Was God mistaken? Will God have to drag Enoch through EGW's I J to make sure "his sins were blotted out"? Poor Enoch, if he fails the I J test he will have to leave heaven and burn in Hell at the end of the world.

Sins were blotted out before 1844. "I have blotted out your transgressions like a cloud and your sins like mist; return to me, for I have redeemed you." (Isa 44:22, ESV) God isn't a hypocrite. When he says he has forgiven us of sin, he doesn't keep it in a black book somewhere, he wipes it out. When God forgave the sins of repentant persons 2000 years ago, he didn't tell them wait till 1844 for forgiveness. If they are already forgiven, how forces could a written record of their sin serve? The blood of Jesus has already covered them, what more can be done in 1844?

I'll also like to challenge my opponent that the sanctuary in heaven is not a carbon copy of the one that was on earth either. Did the veil which separated the Holy from the Most Holy on earth represent another veil in heaven? Or did it represent something else? We know that the lambs sacrificed represented Jesus, who is far difference from a lamb, so why can't some aspects of the Mosaic tabernacle represent something other than a building in heaven?

I look forward to Con's defense of his belief in this very weird doctrine.
Briannj17

Con

Alright let's take care of business...

First, I would like to start with definitions of the key word in your resolution.
Biblical: in accord with the Bible. http://www.dictionary.com...
Accord: To arrive at an agreement or to agree. http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Now as a Seventh day Adventist we are well known for keeping Gods word, and doing everything according to the bible. https://www.adventist.org...
So it will come as no surprise that everything you listed is indeed found in scripture and is biblical. Now I will explain.

THE YEAR 1844

Of course you already know which verse this springs from.

Daniel 8:14 "and he said to me, "For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.""

To find the exact date required much time and was studied thoroughly by a man named William Miller. Here is how the year 1844 was figured and all of it from the bible. I notice that you are most concerned about the starting date and how we managed to come up with the year 457 BC. I will explain thoroughly how we came up with that date.

Daniel 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah.....
So the prophetic period begins with the rebuilding of Jerusalem. This gives us a time to go by. Jerusalem was attacked in 605 BC by Nebuchadnezzar and in 587- 586 BC it was destroyed in 457 BC the persian King Artaxerxes, passed a decree allowing the Jews to return to their homeland to rebuild Jerusalem. Ezra 7:12-13 To Ezra the priest, teacher of the Law of the God of heaven: Greetings. Now I decree that any of the Israelites in my kingdom, including priests and Levites, who volunteer to go to Jerusalem with you, may go.

Going back to Daniel 9;25, "Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks."

Starting from our date in 457 BC and using basic math to figure out Daniel 9:25 (7 x 69 = 483) That's 483 years using what we know. (Ezekiel 4:6; Numbers 14:34; Mark 1:15; Matthew 18:21, 22; Luke 13:1-7) That brings us to 27 AD The year Jesus was baptized or anointed. (Matthew 3:16; Luke 3:21-23; Acts 10:38) Than the bible tells us in

Daniel 9:27 "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."

In the midst of the week we are told he would be a sacrifice to end all sacrifices. 3.5 years after his baptism Jesus died on the cross in AD 31. In A.D. 34, as the prophecy predicted, the Jews finally sealed their doom as a nation. The Jewish high priest, officially rejected Jesus. Adding the remaining 1,810 years and we come to 1844. The link I am adding will help clear this up.
http://www.iaua.name...
https://www.ministrymagazine.org...
http://www.itiswritten.com...
http://www.adventistreview.org...

THE HEAVENLY SANCTUARY

I always thought it was an undisputed fact that God ha a sanctuary in heaven since there are dozens of biblical references supporting the fact. First with some definitions.

Sanctuary: a consecrated place
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Consecrated: dedicated to a sacred purpose
http://www.merriam-webster.com...

First of all if the earthly sanctuary that God ordered to be built was made to model a heavenly one then there must be a correspondence of the two.

Hebrews 8:5 "Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount."

Certainly as I have already mentioned there are many texts in the bible that speak of a temple in Heaven. Which makes an impression that there is a dwelling place for God in Heaven. (Here's a few Rev. 11:19; 14:17; 15:5) Certainly God's dwelling place is not empty. (Rev 4:2 Rev 4:4) We could bring an old testament piece in form Job on e of my favorite books. Job 1:6 goes along with Daniel's description of what went on in Revelation 4:4.

Job 1:6 "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord...

Revelation 4:4 "And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold."

Of course just speculations above but indeed a temple does exist in heaven. Hebrews 8: 1-2 "Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man."

You can take this next verse as you want but it is damning against what you are saying about the heavenly sanctuary not being biblical.

Revelation 15:5 "And after that I looked, and, behold, the temple of the tabernacle of the testimony in heaven was opened:"

As for you saying that there are only two rooms, interestingly Jesus himself said in John 14:2 "In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you."

http://archives.adventistreview.org...
http://www.sdanet.org...

Everything that the Seventh Day Adventist church believes in is biblical. Whether or not it is correct is not for you to judge but I enjoy defending our positions.

INVESTIGATIVE JUDGEMENT

Alright this is what Seventh day Adventists believe started to happen in the year 1844. If we go back to the prophecy in Daniel 8:14 "And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed."

You say there will not be an investigative judgement and that everyone who believes is already saved yet many bible verses contradict that. (BTW rhetorical question what does it truly mean to beleive?)

Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

Everybody will come to be judged, surely the good will not perish but all will come to be judged as also mentioned in revelation.

2 Corinthians 5:10 "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of the Anointed; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad"

Hebrews 10:30 "For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith Yahuwah. And again, Yahuwah shall judge his people"

https://en.wikipedia.org...
https://www.worldslastchance.com...

There will be an investigative judgement going on and it is mentioned in the bible as everything you have said is not biblical in regards to Adventist.

IN CONCLUSION....

I look forward to your response and hope you see that us as Adventists do follow the word that God set before us to the best of our ability and therefore what we do is biblical.
Debate Round No. 2
daley

Pro

I thank my opponent for being willing to participate in this debate. He begins with the claim that Seventh-day Adventists are known for keeping God"s word and doing everything according to the Bible, yet, his only proof of this was a link to his own church's website. The fact is that his church isn't even built according the structure laid out in the Bible for the Christian Church. "And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues." (1 Cor 12:28) "So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up." (Eph 4:11-12) Adventists do not have any living apostles or prophets in their church today, though they do have pastors, teachers and evangelists, so they pick only three out of the five-fold ministry of Ephesians 4. They do not speak in tongues, nor perform miracles, yet all these things are Biblical and part of the church. 1 Corinthians 14:2 says "For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God. Indeed, no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit." Seventh day Adventists don"t obey this verse. I could go on, but the debate is about 1844, the Investigative Judgment (IJ) and Sanctuary doctrine, so let me deal with his rebuttal.

1844
Con tries to find the beginning of the 2,300 days by quoting Daniel 9:25, but this doesn't help him because it doesn't mention the 2,300 days. This verse gives the beginning of the 70 weeks, not the 2,300 days. Then he gives four links to make his argument for him, and I had to endure the tedious task of reading all this information to see if I could find one good argument showing when the 2,300 days began, but found none. My challenge to him is to show me WHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT SAY THAT THE 2,300 DAYS BEGINS IN 457 BC? Yes, the 70 weeks began when the word went forth to restore and rebuild Jerusalem, but where does it say that the 2,300 days began when the word went forth to restore and rebuild Jerusalem? Nowhere, so your doctrine is unbiblical.

Notice he says William Miller came up with the 1844 date. The fourth website in his list said "Millennial hopes culminated in the fervent expectation of Christ's return on October 22, 1844." http://www.adventistreview.org...... It was William Miller who falsely claimed Christ was coming back in 1843. This is the same false prophet who said: "I answer, if will allow the Bible to make a chronology, we shall find this year, 1843, the date - years from Adam's fall will be finished. Then the antitypical Sabbath of a 1000 years will commence. Rev. xx. 6: "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and Christ shall reign with him one thousand years." (Life and Views, p, 157) If he was wrong about 1843, how do we know he isn"t wrong about 1844? He himself rejected Seventh-day Adventism, and all the theories that came out of his movement after he was proven wrong. (William Miller's fifteen proofs - truthorfables.com)http://www.truthorfables.com...'s_Time%2520_Proved_15_Ways.htm#confession, yet Adventists keep saying he was right! And where does the Bible say we should give a false prophet a second chance? Once he was wrong about 1843, he had no place setting the 1844 date. (Mark 13:32)

The fact that 1844 is a false doctrine is proved in the fruit that it produced. SDA prophet Ellen White said: "For a time after the disappointment in 1844, I did hold, in common with the advent body, that the door of mercy was then forever closed to the world . . . I was shown in vision, and I still believe, that there was a shut door in 1844." (Selected Messages 1 p. 63) This doctrine led them to stop preaching the gospel for a long time, but they couldn't keep it up.

Ellen White also said: "I saw that God was in the proclamation of the time in 1843. It was his design to arouse the people, and bring them to a testing point where they should decide"... I saw the people of God, joyful in expectation, looking for their Lord. But God designed to prove (i.e. "test") them. His hand covered a mistake in the reckoning of the prophetic periods. Those who were looking for their Lord did not discover it. " God designed that his people should meet with a disappointment." (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1, pp. 133-137, written in 1858)

Ellen White blamed God for their false prophecy of 1843. Even though it was false, she called it "the truth." Instead of just admitting they were wrong, the SDA Church used these errors to approve another prediction: "The hand of the Lord was removed from the figures, and the mistake was explained. They saw that the prophetic periods reached to 1844, and that the same evidence they had presented to show that the prophetic periods closed in 1843, proved that they would terminate in 1844. Again they had a point of time." (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1, p. 138) http://loudcry.org...

Though the 1843 chart was wrong, Ellen White says it was exactly as God wanted it: "I have seen that the 1843 chart (Wm. Miller's) was directed by the hand of the Lord and that it should not be altered that the figures were as he wanted them." (Early Writings p. 64 edition 1882)

The fact that they blamed God for their error, and taught that God tricked them by hiding the error only then to move his hand, shows this is false doctrine. This isn't the character of the God who does not lie or play games. This should not be the fruit that true doctrine produces.

THE HEAVENLY SANCTUARY
Yes, Hebrews 8:5 says that the earthly tabernacle was a shadow of heavenly things, but this doesn"t prove those heavenly things are exact carbon copies of what is one earth. For example, Hbrews 10:1-2 says the animal sacrifices were also shadows of things to come. When Jesus came he was not a carbon copy of a sheep or goat. Colossians 2:16-17 says that the festivals, new moons and Sabbath are also shadows that pointed to the reality, Christ. Certainly there are no carbon copies of the yearly Passover, Festival of Booths or new moon observances in heaven, is there? In fact, the Bible shows that the veil or curtain which separate the Holy from the Most Holy doesn"t represent another literal curtain up there in heaven as part of a building, but rather, represented Jesus" flesh. "By a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, HIS BODY." (Heb 10:20) Now, here is a problem for my opponent. Jesus' body didn't exist until the incarnation in Mary's womb, so was the heavenly sanctuary that Moses saw in the blueprints missing a piece? All this shows that what is foreshadowed by the OT types like the sanctuary and animal sacrifices are not carbon copies.

I never said there were no buildings in heaven, what I said is that they are not carbon copies of what is on earth. Revelation 4:2, 4; 11:19; 14:17; 15:5 and Job 1:6 do not give a physical description of heaven"s temple, so none of these verses he cited prove it"s a carbon copy of the tabernacle set up by Moses. Also, Revelation is a very symbolic book that borrows Old Testament imagery. When Revelation 14:1 talks about "a lamb" we don"t believe there is a literal lamb in heaven, do we? Revelation 4:5 says that before the throne, the same throne Con is referring to, there are seven lamps. Literal lamps, in heaven? No, this same verse says the lamps represent the seven spirits of God, so the temple, the lamps, is all symbolic imagery drawn from the Old Testament. It's too weak to use as proof of a literal copy of Moses' tabernacle in heaven. I wonder if Con thinks the four living creatures in Revelation 4:7 literally have the faces of a lion, and ox, a man and an eagle. The temple is just as symbolic as these faces, and the lamps.

Con then cites John 14:2, but this just agrees with me that there is no carbon copy of the earthly tabernacle in heaven, for the one on earth only had two rooms, but in heaven there are MANY.

INVESTIGATIVE JUDGEMENT
Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 says that God will judge all our works, so, he is able to do so without reading a bunch of books in 1844 till now. Does it really take an all-powerful, omniscience God over 171 years from then until now to read the records of the lives of people? Further, when the judgment takes place, the resurrected dead will be "standing before the throne" as the books are opened according to Revelation 20:12-13. Since the resurrection didn"t occur in 1844, and since the dead were not "before the throne" in 1844, we know this Investigative Judgment SDAs claim began then didn't really happen.

How ironic that Con would cite 2 Corinthians 5:10. Who appeared before the judgment seat of the Anointed One between 1844 and today?

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS

(1) No reply to the fact that Daniel 8:14 says "evenings and mornings," not years. These are literal days. Nothing about a-day-for-a-year in Daniel 8. The SDAs added that.

(2) No reply to the fact that the type doesn't fit their anti-type: the Lord's goat is to die on atonement day AFTER the yearly service, but SDAs have Jesus die, then do yearly service for 1800 years, before beginning the Day of Atonement in 1844.

(3) No reply to the fact that the vision of the ram, goat and little horn begins in 550 BC with the rise of the Persian horn over the Medes, and not in 457 BC as SDAs claim.

(4) No reply to the atonement being complete by the time Romans 5:Romans 5:1, 9-11; 3:21-25; 1 John 1:7; Ephesians 1:7 and Hebrews 9:12, 24-26 were written.

(5) No reply to Isaiah 44:22, sins blotted out before 1844 when SDAs claim such blotting out of sins began.

(6) No reply to my proof that who is prepared for God's kingdom was known before 1844, making such investigation needless John 10:14; 2 Tim 2:19; Matt 19:28; 2 Tim 4:7-8 and Heb 11.
Briannj17

Con

Okay it's rebuttal time.

The Year 1844

I already showed you how we figured this out biblically. In Daniel 9:25 God gives a specific starting date. "From the going forth of the order to rebuild Jerusalem" Now I showed you the history in writing but perhaps you want more.

In 587-586 BC Jerusalem was destroyed. https://en.wikipedia.org...(587_BC)

In 457 BC the Persian king Artaxerxes passed a decree allowing the Jews to return to their homeland and rebuild Jeruselum. (Ezra 7:12-13, https://en.wikipedia.org...)

Daniel 9 is believed to be written in 522 BC "In the first year of Darius" so the timing fits. Daniel 9:1 http://www.westminster.edu...

Follow the logic: the 70 weeks are "cut off" from the commencement of the 2,300 days because the vision of Daniel 8 begins with the kingdom of the Medes and Persians. Yes of course the year 1844 itself is not biblical, but given the only given start point in the whole prophecy the doctrine itself is biblical. Many well known bible scholars believe that the start of the prophecy mentioned in Daniel 8 even the seventh day Adventist prophet Ellen G White.
http://www.whiteestate.org...

This is why we believe that our doctrine is biblical. Because the only start date in chapter 9. Whether or not our date is absolutely precise does not matter as we don't worship the date or dwell on it but we know the date was set for a reason and all maybe we didn't get the date right, but our doctrine was based on our interpretation of the bible and therefore our doctrine remains biblical.

Stating that we made a misunderstanding on the meaning of "cleansing the temple" does not help your case. That is all your doing. Of course it is a truism that the year 1844 is unbiblical as you will not find that year anywhere in the bible but the doctrine is based on the bible and is therefore biblical. The only time that is mentioned that we don't know is the end of the world as mentioned in Mark 13:32. However cleansing the temple has a different meaning which I'd rather not get into. I have just said that what we believe is biblical. The doctrine that led us to the year 1844 is biblical therefore disproving your claim.

The Heavenly Sanctuary

We have never claimed that things on earth are the exact way as in heaven. SO you admit to there being a sanctuary in heaven? You are claiming that our doctrine on the heavenly sanctuary says that it is an EXACT COPY but that is not what we are saying. All we are saying is that there is a SANCTUARY IN HEAVEN https://www.adventist.org...
in which God dwells and adding the symbolism as seen in the bible Jesus acts as high priest and in the year mentioned in Daniel 8 (which we figure is in 1844) started doing what the high priest would do in the most holy place and go before God and speak for us in investigative judgement. All these things mentioned are found in scripture and therefore are biblical doctrines. (Leviticus 16, Hebrews 2:17, Hebrews 4:14-16, Hebrews 8:1-5, Hebrews 9:11-28, Hebrews 10:19-22, Revelation 8:3-5, Revelation 11:19)

For clarification nowhere do we claim things in heaven are exact to the things made on earth. Our doctrine on the heavenly sanctuary is biblical.

Investigative Judgement

Years are not important. We claim that the year 1844 is biblical and it is using our own interpretation of the bible which therefore proves your resolution wrong. If I felt obligated to I would go into a long spiel of how different people interpret the bible differently but I shouldn't need to to show you that...

1. The year 1844 is found using biblical scripture and the only start date mentioned (Which I showed you) and is therefore biblical.
2. The cleansing of the temple began regardless of what exact year God meant.
3. The temple mentioned is believed to be the heavenly sanctuary mentioned time and time again and is based on biblical references.

Now you seem to be saying that "None of this is God's plan" and though that may be true what the issue at hand is, "Are our doctrines based on the bible?" and you will not find one that isn't.

It's nice that you think you know God better than us. But I feel the same way towards others and claim that our doctrines are sound because they are biblical.

"...so he is able to do so without reading a bunch of books in 1844 until now."
Never do we claim that God is up there reading books and I am baffled at how you come to this. Jesus is making testimonies on all of our behalf's and I am surprised that you have taken to mocking our interpretation. For I have shown you multiple verses that show that we do go through a judgement process and Christ acts as our lawyer so to speak.

1 John 1:6 final part.
And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.

Advocate: a person who speaks or writes in support of a cause, person.
https://www.google.ca...

And nowhere will you find us saying that it takes God 171 years to figure it out. You simply have a misunderstanding of what SDAs believe when it comes to the investigative judgement. What we are saying that God will judge us through Jesus our advocate and according to His requirements. On a sidenote is is written,
Acts 17:31 because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead."
http://ssnet.org...

Now whether the day appointed was in 1844 or whether ti's not the investigative judgement theory is sound based on the multiple texts supporting it.

Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

2 Corinthians 5:10 "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of the Anointed; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad"

Unanswered Questions Answered

Well of course I didn't respond to these as round 2 was only for opening arguments.

1. The SDAs did add that day for a year and for a good reason. If you notice in Daniel 9 the day for a year works for finding the year he was baptized, the year he died and the year the Jews officially denied Jesus as the messiah. Even though those days and weeks are interpreted as physical weeks and physical days. Not only that but biblical text supports the day for a year rule.

2.The sacrifice Jesus made as the scapegoat happened according to the prophecy in Daniel 9. In the midst of the week he is to be a sacrifice to end all sacrifice. The prophecy concerning the 2300 days does not fit into this therefore no. The temple was not cleansed yet when Jesus was crucified and the day for a year must then be the cause.

3. The vision of the goat, ram and little horn has nothing to do with what we are discussing. But this is what SDAs claim on the issue. "The "time, times and half a time" (Daniel 7:25) represents for Adventists a period of 1260 years from 538 CE to 1798 CE..." https://en.wikipedia.org...

4. Again our year we figured is based on biblical texts and though may be never proven right it is a biblical based doctrine. The atonement or cleansing of the temple was to take place as we figure in the year 1844.

5. Who knows from what time God is speaking in this. God is above our form of logic and saying that because he said this he couldn't have judged is ridiculous as as I have already said all will come before the lord to be judged.
2 Corinthians 5:10 "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of the Anointed; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad"

6. Yes he knows his sheep, which is why we have an advocate, a defense attorney in Jesus Christ as mentioned in 1 John 1:6. Your verses are in battle with mine and all yours say is that God knows who the good and who the bad are. What mine are saying is that all will come to be judged before the Lord. Yours can work together with mine. The investigative judgement is a biblically sound argument. 2 Corinthians 5:10

In conclusion....

Interesting round. I am glad we can come to know each others religion more thoroughly. I ask that you HOLD OFF on posting your next round since I don't have any internet on the weekend or tomorrow and therefore will not be able to post in time. Again I still hold fast that our beliefs are all based on the bible and with a faith that they are correct. As I have been saying correctness cannot be judged if we go by what the bible says that is correct in our translation.
Debate Round No. 3
daley

Pro

Con said: " the 70 weeks are "cut off" from the commencement of the 2,300 days because the vision of Daniel 8 begins with the kingdom of the Medes and Persians."

Where is the verse which says that the 70 weeks are "cut off" from the 2,300 days? Nowhere! The Bible never says it, that's why he couldn't bring the verse to prove this unbiblical doctrine. Adventists assume without proof that the 70 weeks is part of the 2,300 days, but the Bible never says so. Yes, the Hebrew word "chatak" at Daniel 9:24 could mean "cut off," but even if we use the term "cut off" here, this verse doesn't say the 70 weeks are "chatak from" the 2,300 days, but rather it says the 70 weeks are "chatak upon" thy people and upon the holy city. You can't cut off a block of time from people and a city because they were never connected to it, but you can "determine" (or "decree") such a time period upon the people and the city, so "determined"/"decreed" is the correct translation. Hebrew scholars have rendered the word in this verse as "decreed" (NIV, ASV, AMP, NLT, ESV, NASB, ISV) "determined" (KJV, NET), and I could list many more, not one of the Hebrew scholars agrees that this word should be translated as "cut off" in Daniel 9:24.

Yes, Daniel 9:25 gives a starting date for the 70 weeks, but it DOES NOT GIVE A START DATE FOR THE 2,300 DAYS. The 2,300 days isn't mentioned at all in Daniel 9, nor is the vision of the ram, goat and little horn, so there is no connection here except in the fertile minds of Seventh-day Adventists bent on muddling these two separate prophecies together.

In round 1 I quoted the Adventist Church as saying: "The phrase "for two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings" (NRSV) defines the entire period that cover the fulfillment of the vision of the ram, the goat, and the little horn"" (Great Apocalyptic Prophecies, p.3) This means that according to them, the events of the Medo-Persian ram take place inside the 2,300 days. I showed proof, proof Con never denied or replied to, that the ascending of the Persian horn over the Median horn took place in 550 BC, long before 457 BC. So if what SDAs say is true about the 2,300 days embracing the vision of the ram, goat, etc, it must begin before 457 BC and thus 457 BC CANNOT be the start date of the 2,300 days.

Adventists make two false claims: (1) that Jesus entered the Most Holy in 1844, and (2) that he did so to perform atonement for us: "In 1844 Christ then entered the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary, to perform the closing work of atonement, preparatory to His coming" (The Great Controversy, page 481)

This contradicts what their own prophet Ellen White wrote about the atonement already being complete before 1844. "He [Christ] planted the cross between Heaven and earth, and when the Father beheld the sacrifice of His Son, He bowed before it in recognition of its perfection. "It is enough," He said. "The Atonement is COMPLETE." "The Review and Herald, Sept. 24, 1901.

"Type met antitype in the death of Christ, the Lamb slain for the sins of the world. Our great High Priest has made the only sacrifice that is of any value in our salvation. When He offered Himself on the cross, a PERFECT atonement was made for the sins of the people." "The Signs of the Times, June 28, 1899.

How then can Jesus be doing "a closing work of atonement" beginning in 1844 when it was a finish, COMPLETE and PERFECT atonement at the cross???? It is heresy to believe that Jesus' had an INCOMPLETE atonement at the cross and he needed to finish his atonement someday in the future. I ask Con, what did Jesus begin to do in 1844 to make atonement, that he was not doing during the 1800 years since his ascension? There is just "one atonement" and it was completed at the cross.

"Not only is this so, but we also boast in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation." (Rom 5:11, NIV) This says Christians were already reconciled to God in Paul's day, which is what atonement means, reconciliation with God. So its false to add another atonement in 1844.

Also, Leviticus 16:2 says "The Lord said to Moses: "Tell your brother Aaron that he is not to come whenever he chooses into the Most Holy Place behind the curtain in front of the atonement cover on the ark, or else he will die. For I will appear in the cloud over the atonement cover." This means that God's presence was always in the Most Holy place. This is also seen in Leviticus 16:13; Exodus 25:21, 22; 30:6, Numbers 7:89, and a comparison of Exodus 25:16-22 with Psalm 80:1; 2 Samuel 6:2; 2 Kings 19:25 and Isaiah 37:16. So for Jesus to enter God's presence when He ascended in the first century (Heb 9:24), He had to enter what was represented by the Most Holy. The plain testimony of Scripture is that Christ sat at God's right hand at the ascension (Act 2:30-36; Eph 1:20; Col 3:1; 1 Pet 3:21-22; Heb 1:3; 8:1; 9:12; 10:12, 19; 12:2; Rev 3:21) So Christ entered God's presence in the Most Holy 2000 years ago when He ascended, not in 1844 as Adventists claim. They false put Jesus in some other room for 1800 years to have him enter the Most Holy in 1844. This shows they don't understand how the OT types were fulfilled.

Con says: "Many well known bible scholars believe that the start of the prophecy mentioned in Daniel 8 even the seventh day Adventist prophet Ellen G White."
Sorry, truth isn't decided by majority vote. Many Bible scholars also believe Sunday is the Lord's day and the immortality of the soul, but SDAs reject these doctrines. Ellen White also believed Christ was coming back to earth in 1844 but she was wrong, so what she believe has nothing to do with proving what Scripture teaches.

Con says: "Whether or not our date is absolutely precise does not matter as we don't worship the date," and that's like saying "it doesn't matter which day is the 7th day of rest, you don't have to get it right as we don't worship the day," yet Seventh-day Adventists don't buy that argument, they claim you must keep Sabbath on the correct day. Dates are very important when dealing with time prophecy.

He says, "However cleansing the temple has a different meaning which I'd rather not get into," and no wonder he doesn't want to go into it, here is why: SDAs claim:
""Papal Rome effectively obscured the priestly, mediatorial ministry of Christ in behalf of sinners in the heavenly sanctuary (see Heb. 8:1,2) by substituting a priesthood that purports to offer forgiveness through the mediation of men. This apostate power would be quite successful, for 'he cast truth down to the ground. He did all this and prospered' (Dan. 8:12)."2

Carefully think this through. Adventists teach "Papal Rome" was the little horn power of Daniel 8:9-12 that defiled the heavenly sanctuary by substituting its own priesthood. Then, in Daniel 8:13, the question is asked: How long will the defilement continue? Or, using Adventist reasoning, "How long will Rome be permitted to defile the Sanctuary?" According to Adventists, the 2,300 years ended in 1844, so was any part of the vision in Daniel 8:10-12 fulfilled in 1844?

"Did the Catholic Church stop the confessional in 1844? No!
"Did the Catholic Church change any of its policies or practices in 1844? No!
"Did Protestantism unveil the truth about Catholicism in 1844? No, several centuries earlier!
"Did any part of Daniel 8:10-12 come to pass in 1844? No!

Daniel 8:14 answers the question posed in verse 13 by saying that after 2300 days, "then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." Cleansed from what? From the defilement in verses 9-12. Adventists say that Rome defiled the sanctuary, so one would think that in order to be consistent, Adventists would teach that the "cleansing" refers to ending Rome's defilement of the heavenly sanctuary. But they do not! Instead, they switch to a completely different subject, and say that the "cleansing" of the sanctuary has nothing to do with Rome, but is talking about cleansing the sins of the righteous from the heavenly sanctuary during the Day of Atonement!"http://www.nonsda.org...

Adventist say: "as the sanctuary on earth had two apartments, the holy and the most holy, so there are TWO holy places in the sanctuary in heaven." (Ellen G. White, Vie Spirit of Prophecy (Oakland, Calif.: Pacific Press Pub. Assn.. 1884), vol. 4, p. 260, but Jesus says "In my Father's house are MANY mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you." (John 14:2, KJV) The SDAs say they are two rooms, Jesus says they are many, clearly the Adventist have it wrong in their idea of what the sanctuary is like. Its not enough to say, yes, there is a sanctuary in heaven, therefore our doctrine is Biblical. You have to have the right view of the sanctuary to be in line with the Bible. If we say there are homosexual angels in heaven right now, surely that would be unbiblical, and it wouldn't be enough to say "well, you did admit there are angels in heaven, so my doctrine of gay angels in biblical." So, yes there is a sanctuary in heaven, but its not like SDAs describe. And much of the symbols in Revelation are being taken way too literally by Con, who doesn't take literally most of what is written in the very chapters he cites from.

2 Corinthians 5:10 "For we must all APPEAR BEFORE the judgment seat of the Anointed." SDAs do not believe anyone was resurrected to APPEAR before Jesus in 1844 for judgment. They have a judgment where people are not even PRESENT to be judged. This isn't Biblical, its against 2 Cor 5:10.

The 70 weeks are not finished, because Dan 9:24 says that during the 70 weeks God would "put an END TO SIN." Sin is still there, so the final week hasn't been fulfilled. The temple will be rebuilt, but will be destroyed (Dan 9:26). I will prove this next round as well. I won't have access to internet tomorrow so I had to post today. Over to Con for his rebuttal.
Briannj17

Con

Hmmmm...

The year 1844

Okay so you admit the word "chatak" could mean cut off. SO using what we know the days could be cut off for the people mentioned. We believe that this cut off is cut off from the previous 2300 days/years making our belief biblical. That is our proof that the 70 weeks is part of the 2300 days. The cut off works in the verse because it is only that group of people that are being addressed. This block of time is cut off for just his people and the holy city. We think we are correct about the time and that is because we got the notion from the bible verse. Therefore making the year 1844 biblical.

Regarding the timeline you say we claim that the whole prophecy regarding the ram took place within the 2300 days. I don't believe this is true and would like to read your source but unfortunately there is no link so how can I or any reader trust what you are saying? Here is the timeline.
http://www.preservedwords.com...

Regarding your use of Ellen G. White to combat my stance won't help you. For this is what I can say. "He [Christ] planted the cross between Heaven and earth, AND WHEN the Father beheld the sacrifice of His Son, He bowed before it in recognition of its perfection. "It is enough," He said. "The Atonement is COMPLETE."

Notice the upper cased words "and when". Ellen G. White was a prophet. What her visions showed were both the future and the past. I am sure she was looking into the future and saw this. So this doesn't hold much for your case.

I can't say that I know for certain what Jesus was doing. Your asking me what he was doing for 1800 years but I could turn around and ask you what has he been doing for the whole history of the earth? Can you give me a solid answer? We don't know the ways of the Lord we are given only a glimpse. Yes Jesus died at the cross in atonement for our sins, this has nothing to do with cleansing the temple. Jesus died on the cross but he needed one final step and that is to cleanse the temple by sprinkling the blood in the holies of holies. That is what Adventists believe happened in 1844. http://www.sdanet.org...

Your taking this debate into other grounds. I don't want to start talking about what Adventists think of the Roman Catholic Church this is about whether our beliefs on 1844, the heavenly sanctuary and the investigative judgement are biblical. I have shown what makes us beleive and those are BIBLICAL verses that I showed and therefore are beliefs regarding the year 1844 the investigative judgement and the heavenly sanctuary are biblical.

In conclusion...
Unfortunately I am out of time.
Debate Round No. 4
daley

Pro

Con says: "Okay so you admit the word "chatak" could mean cut off. SO using what we know the days could be cut off for the people mentioned. We believe that this cut off is cut off from the previous 2300 days/years making our belief biblical."

Wrong, Daniel 9:24 doesn't say "70 weeks are chatak FROM," as if the 70 weeks were a part of a long time prophecy. Rather, it says "70 weeks are chatak UPON," so this verse is not describing the 70 weeks as being part of a longer time prophecy such as the 2,300 days.

Secondly, the same verse says "chatak upon they people and thy holy city," so the relationship given is between the 70 weeks and the people and city, not between the 70 weeks at the 2,300 days.

Third, the vision of the 2,300 days in Daniel 8and the vision of the 70 weeks in Daniel 9 are not a single vision, but are two separate and distinct visions that occurred on different occasions. The vison of the 2,300 days was given in the 1st year of Belshazzar (Dan 8:1, 14) but the vision of the 70 weeks was given in the 1st year of Darius (Dan 9:1, 24). There is no relation between them because Daniel 9 doesn't mention the 2,300 days, the ram, goat or little horn, and Daniel 8 doesn't mention the 70 weeks.

Fourth, even if we assume, as SDAs do, that the 70 were part of the 2,300 days, this would not be enough to show that the start date of the 70 weeks (457 BC) is the start date of the 2,300 days. My lunch hour is part of, and is cut off from, my regular work hours for the day, but that doesn't mean that the start time of my lunch hour must therefore be the start time of my work hours for that day. I have already given the SDA quotes showing that they claim the 2,300 days embraces the vision of the ram, goat, and little horn, so the 2,300 days should begin in 550 BC which is when the events of the ram's horns begin. This also shows that SDAs don't need the 70 weeks to find a start date for the 2,300 days, because if as they claim, the 2,300 days embraces the vision of the ram, goat, and little horn, we do have a start date for the 2,300 day vision in Daniel 8 - namely, the rise of one horn over the other. History testifies this occurred in 550 BC.

Con says: "Regarding the timeline you say we claim that the whole prophecy regarding the ram took place within the 2300 days. I don't believe this is true and would like to read your source."

"What does the phrase "evening and morning" designate? Gen. 1:8, 13; Exod. 27:20, 21; Lev. 24:2, 3.
The phrase "for two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings" (NRSV) defines the period that will cover the fulfillment of the vision of the ram, the goat, and the little horn, including the daily ministry of Christ and the little horn's attack on His work. At the end of that prophetic period an important event is introduced: The sanctuary will be cleansed (vindicated/restored). This is the event that initiates the prophetic period and the event that closes it. What the chapter does not provide is a specific date for the beginning of the period (that comes in Daniel 9).
If the 2,300-day period covers the time span that includes the ram, the goat, and the little horn, why must the 2,300 days not be taken literally?" http://www.ssnet.org... There you have it, from your own SDA source. The thing is, Great Apocalyptic Prophecies is an SDA quarterly that was studied by Adventists the world over for a number of months, so I'm surprised that Con claims to be unaware of this source. He could have simply procured a copy from his church and looked up my quotation.

I have shown that the vision of the ram begins no later than 550 BC, therefore, 1844 is unbiblical because 2,300 years from 550 BC doesn't bring us to 1844.

Con seems to be saying that Ellen White was not speaking about a past atonement on the cross, but about some future atonement that the Father saw after the cross. Here are the SDA quotes with source:

"II. Complete Sacrificial Atonement Made on Cross

He [Christ] planted the cross between heaven and earth, and WHEN THE FATHER BEHELD THE SACRIFICE OF HIS SON, He bowed before it in recognition of its perfection. "It is enough," He said. "The Atonement is complete.""The Review and Herald, Sept. 24, 1901.

Type met antitype in the death of Christ, the Lamb slain for the sins of the world. Our great High Priest has made the only sacrifice that is of any value in our salvation. WHEN HE OFFERED HIMSELF ON THE CROSS, A PERFECT ATONEMENT WAS MADE for the sins of the people. We are now standing in the outer court, waiting and looking for that blessed hope, the glorious appearing of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ."The Signs of the Times, June 28, 1899.

Our great High Priest completed the sacrificial offering of Himself WHEN HE SUFFERED WITHOUT THE GATE. THEN A PERFECT ATONEMENT WAS MADE for the sins of the people. Jesus is our Advocate, our High priest, our Intercessor. Our present position therefore is like that of the Israelites, standing in the outer court, waiting and looking for that blessed hope, the glorious appearing of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ."Manuscript 128, 1897" http://www.sdanet.org...

Words cannot be more clear that the atonement was made AT THE CROSS 2000 years ago, long before 1844. When did the Father SEE Jesus on the cross if not when He died? Yet, in the first of these 3 quotes, that is when the Father says the atonement is complete, which means you can't place atonement in 1844. What's more, Daniel 9:24 says the atonement was to take place during the 70 weeks. SDAs believe the 70 weeks were fulfilled long before 1844. In either case, the atonement in Daniel 9:24 is referring to what Jesus did on the cross.

Con says: "I can't say that I know for certain what Jesus was doing."

Look back at the question I asked. We as Christians know what the atonement was, Christ's death on the cross, where his blood had value to cover our sins. So, I asked, what exactly was this atonement in 1844? Did Jesus die again? Maybe SDAs think it was Jesus acting as our intercessor, but certainly he was our intercessor and advocate long before 1844. So what is it that Jesus began to do in 1844 that he wasn't doing before? The reason why Con can't tell us is because there is nothing new Jesus began to do for us in 1844.

Con says: "Your asking me what he was doing for 1800 years but I could turn around and ask you what has he been doing for the whole history of the earth? Can you give me a solid answer?"

Firstly, these questions are irrelevant to this debate. Look at the title of this debate. It's about SDAs doctrine of 1844 (what exactly happened in 1844), the investigative judgment and the heavenly sanctuary. It's not about the history of the earth. But I could tell you what Jesus was doing for the history of the earth though. Understanding that Jesus is God (Isa 9:6; John 1:1-3, 14; 20:28; Heb 1:6, 8-10), it was therefore Jesus who created the earth, was seen as God in the OT guiding the saints like Abraham in Genesis 18, and Moses in Exodus 3, and after preparing Israel as a nation to a certain point, he died for us on the cross, was raised to heaven where he stands before the Father as our Advocate. Jesus also was ruling in heaven as God before coming to earth. (Col 1:13-19; Php 2:5-8) But that's not the point of this debate. If you claim an atonement took place in 1844, you need to tell us what that atonement was.

He also says: "Yes Jesus died at the cross in atonement for our sins.... Jesus died on the cross but he needed one final step and that is to cleanse the temple by sprinkling the blood in the holies of holies. That is what Adventists believe happened in 1844."

Now, where does the Bible say that Jesus took his blood and sprinkled it in the holy of holies in 1844? It doesn't, this isn't Biblical. Did Jesus cut open his flesh and shake his blood around in ark in 1844? Or was Jesus still bleeding after his resurrection and ascension to heaven? Did He keep bleeding till 1844? I guess Con is imagining Jesus cutting himself to sprinkle his blood in a Day of Atonement ritual in 1844, in the Most Holy. A serious problem with this is that according to Hebrews 9:24-28, Jesus already entered the presence of God long before 1844, and we know from Leviticus 16:2 and all the other passages I gave that God's presence was in the Most Holy. So if Jesus did present his blood before the Father, it didn't happen in 1844 but in the 1st century CE. But Hebrews 9:24-28 also says Jesus offered himself once for all time. He doesn't need to shed his blood again in 1844. This makes a mockery of his atonement on the cross to call it incomplete, needing another step in 1844.

Daniel 9:26 mentions the destruction of the sanctuary, but this can't be the Roman attack in 70 CE, because if you count the 70 weeks (490 years) from 457 BC, this brings you to 33 CE, placing the destruction of that temple outside the 70 week prophecy. Sin is to go during the 70 weeks (Dan 9:24) but sin is still here among Daniel's people, showing the final week is yet to be fulfilled. The sanctuary will be rebuilt, and destroyed again. Its' this sanctuary that will need to be cleansed in Daniel 8:14, not one in heaven. It will be defiled by the little horn, a power on earth, not in heaven. (Dan 8:9-13) Since the defilement takes place on earth, the horn that does the defilement is one earth, then so is the sanctuary. So Con has the wrong sanctuary in Daniel 8:14.

2 Corinthians 5:10 says we will STAND BEFORE Jesus for judgment, and Con used this verse to prop up his investigative judgment. But the judgment SDAs claim began in 1844 has people being judged who are NOT PRESENT BEFORE THE JUDGMENT SEAT of Christ. They therefore have an unbiblical view of the judgment. We will be there when being judged.

Please see all my other unanswered points and questions throughout this debate, and vote Pro.
Briannj17

Con

Okay last round.

A confession on the Year 1844

I never said that it meant "from" but rather"for thy people " this meaning that the days are cutoff for those people only. I already showed you the start date as well as the timelines you need to prove my point about the start date for the 70 weeks and Daniels visions of the beasts. But to be honest I will concede the year 1844 to you. I will not claim that we know the exact date or year of atonement and I have to agree that your explanation is what I myself choose to beleive. I just knew that our doctrines all are based on Scripture but obviously you have shown the year 1844 to be misconstrued.

But as for the other two I have some more arguing to do.

The Heavenly Sanctuary

You seem to be going on a tangent on this. Making a red herring argument. You say we ate taking things to literally yet the verses I mention about the resemblance of the sanctuary on earth being similar to the one on earth is to be taken literally. Also Ellen never said there were only two rooms in heaven. She said holy and most holy are two rooms in heaven. She never limited the amount of rooms. Since I see you've only argued against the year 1844 and it looks like you conceded the Heavenly Sanctuary is a place in Heaven. Since you haven't made any new arguments. I ask voters to see this as since BOP wasn't mentioned it is to be assumed we share it and since my opponent seems to have given up the argument of there being a sanctuary in Heaven that means I win this argument on the Heavenly Sanctuary being in existence and the doctrine behind it as BIBLICAL.

Investigative Judgement

Obviously you have given up on arguing against investigative judgement so I ask voters to see that two out of three doctrines have no ground for my opponent and knowing that BOP is shared leaves a clear vote for con because I have clearly explained how investigative judgement and the heavenly sanctuary ate both BIBLICAL doctrines.

In conclusion...
A most interesting debate. You have gave me good insight on your beliefs but I still hold fast in the two doctrines I mentioned. As for me my name is Brian N. Johnson and thank you for reading.
Debate Round No. 5
23 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by MikeManea 1 year ago
MikeManea
That's not a bad idea. I'll start working on it. But it might take me some time as I've got quite a few things going on right now.
Posted by daley 1 year ago
daley
You go first, because I want you to have all the room to fully explain your doctrine without having to reply to me, and I want 5 rounds, 10 000 words each. Start your explanation in round 1, and I'll rebut you in round 1, etc.
Posted by daley 1 year ago
daley
Ok, I don't believe in once saves always saved either, but I'd love you to challenge me to this debate, "Was the OT Day of Atonement ritual fulfilled in 1844 as SDAs teach?" Then you can explain what happened in that year, how you arrive at that date (which I know is not biblical), and I will show you from the Bible when the atonement ritual of Lev 16 was actually fulfilled
Posted by MikeManea 1 year ago
MikeManea
So out of the 70 instances that the word Atonement appears in the bible, you base your definition of the word off of the one instance that appears in the new testament. And that's fine.

What I am saying that Adventists agree with that:

'we have already been reconciled to God. It doesn't say we have been almost reconciled to God, almost atoned for'

Adventists believe we have already been reconciled to God. Fully reconciled.

What we don't believe in is once saved always saved. People still have a choice to turn away and God separates between believers who abide in Christ and those who don't.

But why do we call this judgment process a day of atonement?

Because we see this as the most likely fulfillment of the old testament Day of Atonement.

In the old sanctuary service the Hebrews celebrated several holidays in the spring and several in the fall. In the spring they had the Passover, the First Fruits and Pentecost. In the fall they had the feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement and the Feast of Tabernacles.

We believe that these feasts were symbolic and they represented real events. The spring festivals represented events at the first coming of Christ, the fall festivals events at the second coming of Christ (the harvest). The Passover represented the death of Christ, the First Fruits, His resurrection, Pentecost, well, Pentecost with the outpouring of the Spirit. In the fall we believe the Day of Atonement represents the pre-Advent judgment and the feast of Tabernacles Christ's second coming. This interpretation of the feasts is much more plausible than interpreting all the feasts as pointing to Christ's death since Pentecost and the First Fruits clearly fit better the way I pointed out above.

So this is the reason we use the term Day of Atonement in reference to 1844. We still believe the actual atonement was completed at the cross but there is still a judgment that differentiates between two kinds of believers before Jesus comes.
Posted by daley 1 year ago
daley
The OT passages connecting "atonement" with animal sacrifices was doing so in a ritualistic, ceremonial sense, because we know that animal blood couldn't truly take away sins. (Heb 10:4) But this meaning of atonement ceased to apply when Jesus provided the ultimate sacrifice on the cross. As Romans 5:11 says "And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement." Here the atonement is said to be something we already have, we have already been reconciled to God. It doesn't say we have been almost reconciled to God, almost atoned for, so Jesus will take the next step to finish it in 1844.

Not once in any of this list of verses you gave does the word "atonement" include anything about an investigative judgment, or entering a the second part of a heavenly sanctuary, etc... So if you choose to invent new definitions of atonement outside what is already contained in Scripture, that's you choice, but I'll stick to what the Bible says as Christians have done for 2000 years.
Posted by MikeManea 1 year ago
MikeManea
Here is the use of 'atonement' in the Bible:

https://www.biblegateway.com...

what meaning exactly do you get from this?
Posted by daley 1 year ago
daley
It's not for you or anybody else to give the word "atonement" a different meaning from what it actually means in the Bible. So whatever it is you think Jesus did in 1844, it wasn't atonement! Furthermore, Jesus already did everything that is necessary to bring us into relationship with him. I must wonder what was necessary in 1844 that he had not done before? But I'll leave that strange doctrine aside.
Posted by MikeManea 1 year ago
MikeManea
Sorry, my previous comment was too long and got cut off. Here is the rest:

But we sometimes use the word Atonement with a different definition: at-one-meant. Meaning the entire work of God to save humanity from the moment Adam fell in Eden to the time when Jesus returns."

You have to understand that different religious traditions use terminology differently. What you mean by Rapture might be very different than what I mean by Rapture. So we should be very careful not to bring up accusations against fellow Christians based on semantics.
Posted by MikeManea 1 year ago
MikeManea
1) 'Archangel means "chief angel," thus, an archangel is still an angel.'

Unfortunately Daley, it's not as easy as that. The word can be interpreted both ways. And, it HAS been interpreted as 'chief OF angels' by significant figures in Christian history, like Matthew Henry, the author of the popular bible commentary. (For more info on why SDAs hold this view see here:"http://bit.ly...)

But whether you agree with us or not isn't the point. There are thousands of denominations in Christianity all of which disagree with each other in some way. The problem is when people use this argument against us dishonestly as follows:

1) SDAs believe Michael the Archangel is Jesus
2) An archangel is an angel and thus a created being
3) Therefore, SDAs reject the divinity of Jesus.

In reality, while SDAs believe Michael is Jesus' pre-incarnation name/title, we don't believe that makes Jesus an angel. We believe Jesus is fully divine and co-eternal with the Father.

So my hope is simply that you have enough integrity not to use the argument this way (not saying you ever did)."

(2) 'The Bible is clear that Jesus is the one who bears our sins'

- SDAs DON'T believe Satan will ever carry OUR sins. We believe he will have to pay for his OWN guilt in tempting us to commit those sins."

This really shouldn't be that difficult.

(3) 'So you have no case here.'

The only 'case' I was trying to make here was that SDAs DON'T believe that God doesn't know who is saved or lost. And I believe I made it.

(4) "2 Cor 5:10 came up because my opponent used..."

- Must have missed that part of the debate. My apologies.

(5) "...atonement in 1844..."

Can you define exactly what you mean by the word 'atonement?'"

If you list the specific things Jesus accomplished in the atonement, I guarantee you that SDAs also believe all those things (unless you believe in Once Saved Always Saved).

But we sometimes use the word Atonement with a different definiti
Posted by daley 1 year ago
daley
MikeManea,

(1) Archangel means "chief angel," thus, an archangel is still an angel. Just as an archbishop is still a bishop, an archangel is still an angel. Michael is just one of a group of other beings like himself, but Jesus is the only-begotten God. Without comparison.

(2) The Bible is clear that Jesus is the one who bears our sins, but SDAs claim that there will come a time when sin will be carried by Satan. Nowhere does the Bible teach this false doctrine.

(3) SDAs writings made it clear they believe the purpose of the IJ is to determine who is ready for the kingdom of God. I didn't make that up, they said it. I quoted it in the debate from SDA writings. The problem with this view is that God had already determined who was saved. Also, the Bible does not say that God needs to prove to the angels that his judgment is just by showing them a record of our sins, nor does it discuss other beings elsewhere to whom he needs to prove it. So you have no case here.

(4) 2 Cor 5:10 came up because my opponent used it to prop us his version of what happened in 1844, and since no one was present before Christ for judgment in 1844, I can safely conclude this was not a fulfilment of 2 Cor 5:10. Nor did he show me where the Bible says that judgment started in 1844. Or did he, or you, show where the Bible breaks down the judgment into stages that will last this long. Its been 170 years since 1844. Is Jesus having the angels read books all this time before sinners can stand in his presence?

(5) To say that Jesus performs any other atonement in 1844, is to say that the one he made on the cross was not enough, and we needed another one. Atonement is reconciliation with God. What could Jesus BEGIN in 1844 that he wasn't or hadn't done before, to make us right with God?

You can challenge me to any debate. You want. In fact, I think I might even challenge you to one on SDA pet doctrine, the Sabbath.
No votes have been placed for this debate.