Chapter 10
9:24, so there is no basis to apply
22 Points
1
Dr Ford lists 22 points as
representative of a prolonged series
of assumptions and inferences that
provide “perilous dependence” for
the Adventist position on the
sanctuary interpretation of 1844 and
the investigative judgment.
For those who do not have the time to
read Dr Ford’s “Dan 8:14 The Day of
Atonement and The Investigative
Judgment” it is fair to say that his 22
points summarise the entirety of the
publication.
Let us list each one and refer the
reader to the specific pages in this
work that deals with it:
1 That Dan 8:14 speaks of
2300 days. (While Dan 12
repeatedly uses the Hebrew word
for days, it is not to be found in
8:14. Instead we have the
ambiguous “evening morning”
which most apply to the evening
morning burnt offerings. Thus
instead of 2300 days, if these
exegetes are correct, only 1150 days
are in view).
See Chap 2, espec p.33 (points 1, 2).
2. That these 2300 “days”
equal 2300 years. (Though it is
quite impossible to prove that the
Year-day principle is a Biblical
datum, and even if we could, days
are not mentioned in either 8:14 or
124
the principle in these instances).
See Chapter 2 in its entirety.
3. That these 2300 years begin
centuries before the “little horn”
began his attack on the sanctuary.
(Though in the context, the 2300
has been understood by many as
applying to the length of time the
little horn is trampling the
sanctuary underfoot and
suspending its daily offerings).
See page 33 point 3 and chapter 3 in
its entirety.
4. That the 2300 years begin at
the same time as the seventy weeks.
(Though there is no Scripture to
say so. The Hebrew chatak means
“cut” or “decree” and there is no
way of proving that the cutting off
of the 490 from 2300 is intended).
See pages 57-58; 82-83.
5. That it is possible to be
certain of the exact year that the
seventy weeks begin. (Though
exegetes have never been agreed on
this point. Is the decree like that of
9:23, a heavenly one from God or
from an earthly king?)
See Chap 5.
6. That the decree of
Aratxerxes recorded in Ezra 7 has
to do with the restoring and
building of Jerusalem. (Though
there is nothing in Ezra 7 that says
this. The context says that this
decree, like those of Cyrus and
Darius, had to do with the temple.
The magistrates were to enforce
the temple laws. See Ezra 6:14
124
Chapter 10
which places this decree among the
temple decrees).
See pages 62-72.
7. That the decree of Ezra 7
“went forth” in 457 BC when Ezra
had arrived in Jerusalem and set to
work. (Though Ezra never says
this and the decree had been
announced at least six months
earlier. There is nothing in Daniel
to say that this decree should be
dated from the time of its
implementation rather than its
enunciation).
See pages 62-72.
8. That we can show 408 BC to
be the time when the restoration of
the city was completed. (Admitted
by Adventist scholars to be an
impossible task).
This is indeed an impossible task.
If the starting date of 457 BC is
accepted and the Year-day principle
is accepted and the links between
Dan 9:24 and 8:14 are recognized,
then it follows that the prophecy
foretold a 49 year period to rebuild
the city. That is all we need to know.
9. That we can show that AD
27 was the date of Christ’s
baptism. (A similarly difficult feat).
Luke 3:1 records that Jesus’ baptism
occurred in the 15th year of Tiberius
Caesar (Tiberius Claudius Nero). His
first regnal year was AD 14 making
his 15th year AD 28. If the starting
date of 457 BC is accepted and the
Year-day principle is accepted and
the links between Dan 9:24 and 8:14
are recognized, then it follows that
the prophecy foretold the appearance
125
of the Annointed One in AD 27 /
AD28.
10. That AD 31 was the date of
the crucifixion. (Almost all
scholars hold to other years, not
this one. Evidence from Grace
Amadon’s researches, often used
by SDAs, is based on doubtful
assumptions, as admitted in our
own commentary).
If the starting date of 457 BC is
accepted and the Year-day principle
is accepted and the links between
Dan 9:24 and 8:14 are recognized,
then it follows that the prophecy
foretold the death of the Annointed
One in the midst of the last week of
the seventy sevens period.
11. That AD 34 was the date of
the gospel going to the Gentiles.
(Though there is no way of proving
that AD 34 was the time of the
stoning of Stephen, and Acts 13:46
presents the turning to the Gentiles
at a much later date).
“By the stoning of Stephen
(Acts 7:54) the Jews sealed
their final rejection of the
gospel. The disciples who
were scattered abroad by
persecution “went everywhere
preaching the word” (Acts 8:4)
and shortly after, Saul the
persecutor was converted and
became Paul the apostle to the
Gentiles”. (PK 699).
Acts 13:46 in the KJV can read as
confirmation of the earlier-decided
transition as it is not specific enough
to mark the transition.
125
Chapter 10
12. That the 2300 days end with
the beginning of the antitypical
Day of Atonement. (Though the
Day of Atonement revolved around
the sacrifice for sin, an event we
believe took place about 18
centuries earlier. The divesting of
His glorious robes by the high
priest prefigured the incarnation of
Christ which did not take place in
1844. The Book of Hebrews clearly
applies the Day of Atonement in
antitype to Christs’ priestly
offering of Himself on Calvary,
though the Christian era is
included as we wait for our High
Priest to come out).
See chapter 7 (with Appendix)
and chapter 8.
13. That until this date was
reached, Christ was doing that
work prefigured by the first
apartment outside the veil.
(Though Hebrews tells us that the
work of that apartment symbolized
the ineffectual offerings of the
Levitical era when men had
restricted access to God and
experienced outward ceremonial
cleansing rather than perfection of
the conscience),
See chapters 7 (with Appendix)
and chapter 8.
14. That the work symbolized by
the second apartment of the
sanctuary was not to begin till over
1800 years after the Cross.
(Though Heb 9:8, 12, 24, 25; 10:19,
20; 6:19, 20 says Christ entered
“within the veil” at His ascension).
The sprinkling of the blood on the
mercy seat took place immediately
after its shedding.
126
See chapter 7 with Appendix.
15. That the sanctuary of Daniel
8:14 means the sanctuary in
heaven. (Though the context is
about the sanctuary on earth).
See pages 41-44.
16. That “cleansed” is an
accurate translation in Dan 8:14.
(Though this is certainly not the
case).
See pp 46-50 and App to Ch 1 and 4.
17. That the sanctuary on the
Day of Atonement was cleansed
from defilement occasioned by the
confession of sin and ministration
of blood. (Though Numbers 19:13
etc indicate that the sanctuary was
defiled when a person sinned,
regardless of whether confession
was made. In most cases blood
never went into the sanctuary).
See pp 46-50 and Appendix to Ch 4.
18. That the cleansing of the
sanctuary in Dan 8:14 has to do
with the sins of the professed
believers in Christ. (Though the
context has to do with a defilement
accomplished by Anti-Christ, not
the host of God’s people who are
suffering, not sinning, in the
context).
See pp 46-50 and App to Ch 1 and 4.
19. That this cleansing of Dan
8:14 is also found in Dan 7 in its
judgment scene and that the latter
also has to do with investigation of
the sins of the saints. (Though
again in Dan 7 as in 8, it is a wicked
power which is the focus of the
judgment).
126
Chapter 10
See pp 46-50; 53-55; App Ch 1 & 4.
20. That Rev 14:7 has to do with
the same investigative judgment of
the sins of the saints. (Though
John never uses the word krisis
other than in a negative sense – for
unbelievers, and though the very
next verse tells us that it is Babylon
which endures the judgment, as the
later chapters of Revelation also
testify).
John presents the krisis for
unbelievers in Rev 20:12-15. It
occurs after the millennium. The
judgment of Rev 14:7 is indeed a
krisis for professed believers who do
not rest in God ( pp 105-106). Dan 7
depicts a judgment scene before the
second advent which must be the
judgment of the righteous (pages 11-
12; see App to Ch 1 pp xiv-xxiv) as
the wicked are judged after the
millennium. Rev 14:7 depicts an
announcement of fact the judgment
has come and the announcement is
made before the second advent (vs
14). The interpretation that Rev 14:7
depicts a pre-advent announcement of
judgment that has arrived only makes
sense in the context of all that has
been written in this document. In
isolation the text can be interpreted in
a variety of ways.
21. That verses like Acts 3:19
point to the investigative judgment.
(None of such verses studied in
context yield any such conclusion).
I do not share that view but welcome
direction if it does point to an
investigative judgment.
22. That much depends upon
Oct 22, 1844 as the beginning of the
127
antitypical Day of Atonement.
(Though Oct 22, 1844 was not the
day observed by contemporary
Jews, even the majority of
Karaites. Neither is there evidence
that the baptism of Christ or the
stoning of Stephen took place on
the Day of Atonement which would
have been necessary if the 49 years,
the 434, 490 and 2300 years are
each precise in terminus. In
contrast observe that Ellen White
could write; “I saw that God was in
the proclamation of the time in
1843… Ministers were convinced of
the correctness of the positions
taken on the prophetic periods”
(SG 232). Observe she is talking
about the 1843 terminus, not Oct
22, 1844, Furthermore she is
speaking of periods ending then,
not just one period. Miller had
over a dozen, including the 6000
years, the seven times, the 1335
days etc).
I do not hold to a particular day and
month when considering 1844. Such
precision is unimportant. My view is
that the terminus of the 2300 day
period is 1844. I welcome direction
on the value of dates specific to the
day and month.
Good News
For Adventists
A publication entitled ‘Good News
for Adventists’ comprising 39 pages
was published by Good News
Unlimited in 2000. It is a simple
distillation of more scholarly work
produced by Dr Ford in prior years
and is aimed at Adventist laity. I am
not so sure the title is appropriate
because it has an unsettling effect on
127
Chapter 10
those Adventists who are not well
informed. The following is an honest
attempt to respond to residual
objections raised in the publication.
Objections are listed in bold and
answers to each are in plain typeface.
Daniel 8:14 is linked to Leviticus 16
by the word ‘cleansed’. From this
assumption comes the belief that
Daniel 8:14 refers to the Day of
Atonement. The word used for
‘cleansed’ in Daniel 8:14 is not the
word used for ‘cleansed’ in
Leviticus 16. Thus there is no
legitimate way of leap-frogging
from Daniel 8:14 back to the Day
of Atonement chapter in Leviticus
16”. (page 8)
See pp 46-52 and App to Ch 1 & 4.
The “nitsdaq/tsadaq” study in App
to Ch1 (xiv-xxiv) and Ch 4
wholeheartedly supports that
translation “cleansed”. The Greek
word translated “purified” in
Hebrews 9:23 KJV (and translated
“cleansed” in the NAS and ASV)
comes from the same Greek word the
Septuagint uses in Lev 16 and Dan
8:14 in reference to cleansing the
sanctuary. Thus Heb 9:23 is making
a direct reference to Dan 8:14. Two
non-Adventist scholars also see a
reference to the DA in the heavenly
sanctuary in Heb 9:23.1
Traditional Adventism teaches that
the word for ‘days’ in Daniel 8:14
means just that – 2300 full twenty-
four hour days. But the Hebrew
1
Craig Koester “Hebrews” The Anchor Bible
Series (Doubleday New York, NY) 2001 p.247
and David De Silva “Perseverance in Gratitude”
(William B Eerdmanns Pub Company, Grand
Rapids, Michigan) 2000 pp 312-313
128
term used is not ‘days’ but
‘evening-mornings’. So the phrase
literally refers to ‘2300 evening-
mornings’ or as many modern
scholars recognize, perhaps 1150
total days. The KJV translation
has been proven inaccurate. What
then is the meaning of ‘2300
evening-mornings’? Is it perhaps a
reference to the evening-morning
sacrifices of the Jewish sanctuary?
But here we see Adventism
building a doctrine upon a Hebrew
term not even found in its major
proof text and the translation of
that text is still debatable. (page 8)
See Chapter 2. This objection also
implies that no doctrine should be
founded on a single Scriptural
passage (particularly one which itself
requires interpretation) but must be
built on the testimony of two or three
witnesses to establish it. It is correct
the number 2300 appears but once in
Scripture. That such single
appearance does not depreciate its
worth is evident from the number
‘seventy sevens’ which also appears
but once, yet it points to the biggest
event in human history. In both cases
the date serves as a pointer to a
momentous event. Our purpose must
be to look past the date and to the
event itself. The doctrine is not the
date so objection to a solitary passage
for the date is a secondary one. There
is only one reference for the 2300 day
time period but not so for the pre-
advent investigative judgment. The
name ‘investigative judgment’ has
been criticized as it is never referred
to as such in Scripture but this is also
true for the ‘pre-advent judgment’
and ‘the millennium’. The English
phrase 2300 ‘days’ does indeed
128
Chapter 10
derive from the Hebrew phrase 2300
‘evening morning’ which is also
found in Genesis 1. Chapter 2 deals
with the objection. If unequivocal
clarity is the absolute prerequisite for
all statements of inspiration,
theologians would quickly be out of a
job and the books of Daniel and
Revelation would not have been
closed until the time of the end. The
messenger instructs us to “know and
understand”. That instruction implies
studious effort resistant to gnat-
straining while swallowing camels.
Traditional Adventism teaches that
the ‘seventy weeks’ of Dan 9:24 are
the first part of the 2300 days of
Daniel 8:14. Why? It is felt that
the word ‘determined’ in Dan 9:24
should be translated ‘cut off’. So
Adventism cuts off (subtracts)
seventy weeks from the 2300 days.
We feel such exegetical footwork is
unwarranted. Overwhelming
evidence from every Hebrew
lexicon reveals that ‘determined’ is
the meaning of Daniel 9:24, not
‘cut off’. In some non-Biblical
literature the Hebrew word can
mean ‘cut off’. But such is not the
case in Daniel 9:24. (page 8)
The chazon/mar’eh word study in
pages 57-58 and 82-83
wholeheartedly supports the
connection.
The word ‘tsadaq’ translated
‘restored’ is translated less
accurately as ‘cleansed’ to allow
erroneously linking of Daniel 8:14
with Leviticus 16.
See pp 46-52; App to Ch 1 xix-xxiv.
Traditional Adventism asserts that
the 2300 days (and 70 weeks) begin
129
exactly in 457 BC. Why? Because
it is assumed that the decree to
restore and rebuild Jerusalem
(Daniel 9:25) was fulfilled by King
Artaxerxes 1 in 457 BC. (Ezra
7:13-26). However the decree
found in Ezra 7 deals with
restoring the temple, not the city.
Furthermore the Bible says that
Cyrus is the only king that will
‘rebuild my city’ (Isaiah 44:28) –
not Artaxerxes. A further point is
that most scholars flatly reject 457
BC and Artaxerxes 1 as the author
of the decree, as the date for Ezra’s
return to Jerusalem. (Page 8)
See Chapter 5.
Traditional Adventism teaches that
Christ ascended to the first
apartment of the heavenly
sanctuary (the holy place). This
‘holy place’ phase of Christ’s
ministry, supposedly continued
until October 22, 1844. At that
time Christ moved into the second
apartment of the heavenly
sanctuary (the most holy place) to
begin a special work of
‘investigative judgment’. In other
words it was 1800 years after the
cross until Jesus finally began His
‘most holy place’ ministry. The
Scriptural support for the above
position comes from a serious
misunderstanding of Hebrews 9.
Hebrews 9 teaches that Christ
entered ‘within the veil’, that is
‘the most holy place’ at His
ascension (Heb 6:19-20; 9:8, 12, 24,
25; 10:19-20). In fact, Hebrews
tells us that the first apartment
phase of the sanctuary service,
symbolized the ineffectual and now
obsolete offerings of the Levitical
129
Chapter 10 130

era (9:9-10). It was the Most Holy by Justinian as the means of uniting
Place ministry that truly typified all the churches in the East and West
the work of Christ (Heb 9:8, 24, under Justinian’s imperial
25). The News Testament knows of dominance. Thus began with
no double phase ministry of Christ Vigilius the process whereby the
in the heavenly sanctuary. Read popes became more and more men of
SDABC on Hebrews 9 whose the State as well as the church and
writers are only echoing what all often became rulers of the State.
other New Testament scholars have AD 538 is clearly a significant date
said for centuries. (page 9) for these reasons.
See Chapter 7 with Appendix.
(iii) 1798 is not particularly
The Papacy significant. Papal persecution
ceased long before that. The pope
(i) Was not supreme over Europe’s
was placed at the mercy of the French
monarchs from 538-1798. About
Revolutionary Government in 1798
three centuries is nearer the mark.
which advised him Roman religion
The prophetic time period contains
would become the irreconcilable
three stages of papal influence: rising
enemy of the French Republic. He
to dominance (538-1000), full
was taken prisoner by General
dominance (1000-1300) declining
Berthier who proclaimed the political
dominance (1300-1798). See (ii) and
rule of the papacy at an end. The
(iii) that follows:
pope died in exile. It is not the
pope’s death or captivity which is
(ii) The Ostrogoths were not
significant but the removal of his
uprooted in AD 538. The correct
political power. It should not escape
date is 554. Justinian’s decree of AD
our notice that AD 538 not only
533 legally recognized the pope’s
marked the beginning of the release
ecclesiastical supremacy but could
of the pope’s captivity giving him
not be put into effect while the Arian
freedom to exercise political rule and
Ostrogothic kingdom was in control
1798 marked the beginning of the
of Rome. It is correct that the
pope’s French captivity marking the
Ostrogothic nation was conquered
end of Rome’s church-state system.
many years after AD 538 but in that
Within that time span persecution
year Justinian landed another army in
could be levied and there is no
Italy and in March AD 538 the
expectation that it would promptly
Ostrogoths abandoned the siege of
begin in 538 and abruptly cease in
Rome. This marked the real end of
1798. See answer to (i).
Ostrogothic power (though not of
their nation) and it marked the release
(i) The judgment of Daniel 7 occurs
of pope Vigilius from Arian control
while antichrist is ‘wearing out’ the
allowing him freedom to exercise the
saints.
prerogatives of Justinian’s earlier
It is impossible to lock down the first
decree. Vigilius owed his office to
14 verses to specific time points
Empress Theodora and was regarded
because they cover a broad expanse
130
Chapter 10
from ancient Babylon to the Second
Advent. The same broad sweep is
evident in verses 25-26. The
persecution referred to in the
objection is depicted in verses 8 and
25 and renewed persecution by the
little horn immediately prior to the
Advent is depicted in verses 11 and
26.
(ii) Daniel 12:7 uses the same
imagery saying that destruction of
antichrist comes when the
shattering of God’s people over ‘a
time, times, and a half’ ceases.
This is not the same historical point
as 2300 years after the decree to
rebuild Jerusalem. SDAs believe
papal persecution ceased in 1798,
not in 1844.
The following quotation is Dr Ford’s
1978 response when he was
sympathetic to historicism:
“The answer given now to
Daniel is that the time of the
unsealing of the book and the
increase of knowledge could
not dawn until the long
centuries of papal supremacy
were over. The message
concerning the opening of the
judgment and the beginning of
the eschatological work of
vindication could not take
place before that period of
intense religious activity
succeeding the end of the time,
times and half a time when
men turned their attention to
latter-day prophecies”.
As explained SDAs believe
persecution ceased well before 1798.
Attempts to pinpoint persecution and
131
judgment beginning and ending at
specific times will fail because the
verse and context cover a broad
expanse.
The little horn is judged in Daniel
8, not God’s people. The judgment
verses in Daniel 7 speak of
judgment upon antichrist not
believers (Verses 10-11; 25-26).
Daniel 7:22 says that the judgment
is ‘in favor of the saints’ (NASB)
not of the saints.
See pp 53-54; App to Ch 1 xiv-xxiv.
The little horn cannot be judged in
the sense of a vindicative judgment
which is what is portrayed here but it
is certainly condemned as a result of
that judgment. The theme of Daniel
is vindication of God’s people who
have been oppressed by powers
contrary to God’s government. The
verb tsadaq has to do with the notion
of restoring righteousness to those
whose right to regain it has been
taken away. This type of judgment
cannot apply to the little horn.
See Ps 7:8-9; 26:1-2 where the verb
tsadaq is used. The wicked one
served as the accuser in court (Zech
3:1-4; Ps 35:1). What we have in
Dan 7:9-10 is vindication of the
righteous that confirms the evil of the
wicked. In order to restore the
righteous the wicked that caused the
disruption are condemned and
removed. In Dan 7:10-11; 25-26 the
righteous are vindicated by judgment
and the little horn is condemned by
its destruction. A ‘must read’ is App
to Ch 1 pp xiv-xxiv.
Investigative Judgment
Cannot be understood unless
proficient in original languages,
131
Chapter 10
calendar systems, arithmetic,
Adventist history and astronomy.
I am not proficient in any of these
and hold no degree in religion.
I have enjoyed researching the
subject. It has considerably deepened
my understanding of the plan of
salvation and justification by faith.
I heartily recommend the study to any
Christian. The extent of detail in my
work was precipitated only by
voluminous scholarly argument
against the doctrine, otherwise it
would have been a much shorter read.
Developed as face-saving device to
deal with 1844 Disappointment.
That is a matter of conjecture and is a
subjective opinion. The pioneers
considered they were right about the
date but not the event and subsequent
study led them to the answer. A good
model for all of us. That faces were
saved was a bonus but not the main
driver. It is incorrect to charge the
pioneers with inventing the notion of
“vindication” as that is the very
meaning inherent in tsadaq. (See
pages 46-50). They were obviously
on the right track.
The doctrine robs believers of
assurance now and vitiates efficacy
of Calvary.
When understood in the light of the
cross the doctrine does the exact
opposite, considerably strengthening
the truth of justification by faith.
This has been my precise experience
in researching the subject. (See pages
54-55; 100-104).
By relying on the principle “as in
the type so in the antitype” the
doctrine teaches that only the
132
saints are judged whose
examination began in 1844.
It is understood that not every stick of
furniture in the earthly sanctuary
should find an equivalent in the
heavenly. This is not the principle of
type and anti-type which endeavors
to teach a principle. The sacrificial
lamb is a type of Christ’s sacrifice
and no extraneous details about a
lamb should be exported to the Savior
other than innocence and compliance.
If you accept that the cleansing
depicted in Dan 8:14 echoes Day of
Atonement sanctuary language then it
is unavoidable that God’s people
come into view in the judgment that
occurred on that day. The scapegoat
Azazel was not judged on that day,
only condemned. Similarly the little
horn is not judged in Dan 8 but
ultimately condemned.
Forgiven sins only provisionally
forgiven.
Quite incorrect. See Chapters 8 and
9.
Any forgiven sin not overcome
remains against the believer.
This is incorrect. See ‘The Great
Controversy’ page 483 and read the
first paragraph in the context of the
second which in essence says that
justification by faith results in not
only a full pardon and a blotting out
of records but more importantly they
are “accounted” worthy of eternal
life. This does not mean they must
be worthy. They are accounted
worthy. This is righteousness by
faith. See Chapters 8 and 9.
Hebrews does not teach Christ
entered the first apartment of
132
Chapter 10
heavenly sanctuary at His
ascension.
See Chapter 7 and Appendix.
See also SDA Sabbath School Lesson
Quarterly (July-Sept 2003) pages 71-
75; 80-82; 84.
The Investigative Judgment is not
to be found in Scripture except for
inferences from debatable
passages.
It is sincerely hoped the whole of this
work addresses that troubling
proposition.
The parallels between Daniel 7 and
8 equates the cleansing (restoring)
of the sanctuary in Daniel 8 with
the judgment of Daniel 7 is correct
but it is a cleansing from the work
of the little horn (antichrist) not a
cleansing from the sins of the
saints. The question of Daniel 8:13
is about the little horn to which
verse 14 is the answer.
See pp 46-52; 53-54; Append Ch 4.
When the Investigative Judgment
doctrine was first taught, its
proponents said Christ’s
atonement was not completed until
1844. The doctrine has undergone
many changes since than. If we are
saved the same way as the thief on
the cross, what contribution does
1844 really make?
See pages 100-104; Append to Ch 6.
The issue of 1844 and the
Investigative Judgment are easily
resolved by reading Hebrews 9 in
any accurate modern translation.
It is a well-established Christian
principle that the Old Testament is
to be understood in the light of the
133
New Testament. (The doctrine of
1844 and the Investigative
Judgment seeks to interpret the
New in the light of the Old.)
Hebrews is the only book in the
Bible that examines the meaning of
the Day of Atonement ceremonies.
The early verses of Hebrews 9 tell
us that the two apartments of the
earthly sanctuary represent the two
covenants and the two eras of the
Old Testament and the New.
Verses 8, 12, and 25 say that Christ
fulfilled the Day of Atonement type
by his death and resurrection
atonement. Hebrews 9:23
(compare 1:3 where the Greek root
for ‘cleanse’ is the same) tells us
the heavenly sanctuary was
cleansed by the sacrifice of Christ
on Calvary. The very heart of the
ancient Day of Atonement was the
sacrifice. There was no sacrifice in
1844. Let none think that when
Jesus cried, ‘It is finished!’ on the
cross he really meant, ‘It is begun.’
Neither should any miss the
glorious truth that Hebrews clearly
teaches: Christ entered the
heavenly Most Holy Place by virtue
of his death. (Scripture’s
symbolism says he entered the
Most Holy Place through the veil,
or curtain, which is His body,
10:19.) Ever since Christ made His
grand entrance, the way into the
presence of God has stood open for
the guilty. Christ has dealt with
sin, and reconciled the world.
Salvation has been achieved for all.
It is not our sins dragged up again
in the Investigative Judgment that
excludes us from salvation. Only
unbelief in the sacrifice of Christ
can exclude us from God’s loving
133
Chapter 10
gift of perfect righteousness and
eternal glory (Rom 5:9-21; 2 Cor
5:14-25; Heb 6:19; 10:11-14, 19-
22).
See chapter 7 and Appendix and
pages 100-104.
You should meditate on whether it
is legitimate for you or anyone to
make so much of the exegesis of a
single verse (i.e. Dan 8:14). No
doctrine of importance hangs on
one verse. Seven times the
Scripture says that in the mouth of
two or three witnesses shall every
word be established. 2
Dan 8:14 is an answer to the question
posed in Dan 8:13 which itself
contains much detail. The
“chazon/mar’eh” word study in
pages 25, 33, 34, 45, 50, 51, 57-58,
82, 83 is strong evidence that the
question of Dan 8:13 is concerned
with the whole vision of Daniel 8 and
not just the work of the little horn.
Dan 8:14 is therefore built on the
whole of Daniel 8 and not just one
verse. A leading Australian
Adventist scholar at Avondale
College confirmed in a letter to me
on 14 December 2003 that Dan 8:14
is paralleled in Daniel 7:9-11. That
being the case, Daniel 8:14 finds
support in:
1. Daniel 8:13
2. the whole of Daniel 8
3. Daniel 7:9-11.
It cannot be said that the Investigative
Judgment doctrine depends on the
one solitary verse of Dan 8:14.
Adventists have been criticized in the
past for ignoring the question of Dan
8:13 and only seeking to exegete Dan
134
8:14. In response to such criticism
they have now linked the two (See
Chapters 3 and 4) and in so doing
expand support for Dan 8:14. Critics
of the investigative judgment should
ponder why need for a millennium to
judge the wicked “slain by the
brightness of His coming” at the
Second Advent?’ Clearly their
destiny is determined at the Second
Advent but Rev 20 teaches a post-
Advent investigative judgment.
Similarly, destiny of the righteous is
set the moment they receive Christ
but there is also need for a ‘post-
justification’ investigative judgment.
Daniel 8:14 is the only verse in
Scripture depicting a time period
of 2300.
I note the same critics see a
Messianic fulfillment in Daniel 9:24,
the only Scriptural reference to
“seventy sevens”. The same critics
add the words “years” which are not
in the original language so the verse
reads “seventy sevens of years”. The
same critics are quick to criticize
those who read “days” into Dan 8:14
but they do exactly this by reading
“years” into Dan 9:24. Daniel 8:14 is
only important for depicting an event
occurring at the terminus of a time
period. Daniel 8:13 and the whole of
Daniel 8 coupled with the scene in
Daniel 7:9-11 provide the details
summarized in Dan 8:14.
1
Dr D. Ford “Dan 8:14 The Day of
Atonement & The Investigative
Judgment” (1980) Euangelion Press.
Pages 174-176
2
Dr D. Ford. Email dated 5 January
2004 to the author.
134