PART 2 Gods Church Will Weather

The Thunder, Wind and the Rain!!

The Part 2 Response to Elce Thunder Lauristons
2016 Religious Hardtalk Presentation!!
By Derrick Gillespie
Derrick Gillespie is a trained teacher in the Social Sciences, History, and Geography, and
remains a member of the SDA Church in Jamaica and a lay evangelist for SDAs.
(Contact Info: ddgillespie@live.com OR https://www.facebook.com/derrick.gillespie)

Published April, 2016

1 Kings 19:11-12 Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the LORD. And,

behold, the LORD passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains,
and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD; but the LORD was not in the
wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the LORD was not in the
earthquake. And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire:
and after the fire a still small voice.
God speaks to me not through the thunder and the earthquake but through
the Son of Man, and speaks in a language adapted to my imperfect sight and
hearing.
-- William Lyon Phelps
Be grateful for luck [blessings]. Pay the thunder no mind - listen to the birds.
And don't hate nobody. --- Eubie Blake

--- Prove all things --1

INTRODUCTION:
As indicated in the closing portions of the part 1 presentation--- which was aimed at
respectfully responding to and refuting the charges and claims of brother Elce
Thunder Lauriston who had defected from SD Adventism in Jamaica and had made
public on Religious Hardtalk his concerns about and charges leveled at SD Adventism
(a Church he now deems an anti-Christian cult)--- this part 2 presentation will deal
specifically/largely with clarifying and defending the 1844 Investigative Judgment and
Sanctuary Messages of SD Adventism, in response to the charges of Brother Thunder.
Click the links above to view my part 1 responses and the Hardtalk appearance of
brother Thunder Lauriston. Also see the picture of Brother Elce Lauriston at the front
of this part 2 presentation, and (if interested; though I strongly recommend it) view a
potent past [or SDA-related] sermon of his at this link, in order to become acquainted
with how mightily he was used of God in the past in Adventism (because despite his
present state of being misguided ---in my humble opinion--- yet I will always treasure
his sermons like the one linked above).
Brother Lauriston is a Misguided Scholar in Apocalyptic or Prophetic Matters,
including as it Concerns the SDA Sanctuary and 1844 Judgment Message
As I said in my part 1 presentation, its in this area of prophecy-related matters that it
was evidenced that Brother Thunder had bitten off more than he could chew. And I
say this speaking firmly from a position of being a member of SD Adventism for over 40
years (compared to brother Lauristons seven or eight years in the Church), and from a
position where I have personally looked deeply and critically at SDA teachings from
every possible angle, as is humanly possible; including studying out what the critics say,
and critically assessing the apologetic arguments presented by SDAs to defend their
theology. I dare say that: I do know what I am talking about!!!
While I will grant Brother Thunder the honesty in admitting on Hardtalk that because
of his lack of a Ph.D. in theology he could be wrong, yet he had proceeded to
confidently reel off so much of what he read from the anti-SDA critics (like the former
SDA, Dale Ratzlaff), that one wonders if he realized how woefully misguided he was
sounding in this area (including thinking that one has to have a PhD in theology to
understand the deep things of the Bible). It is in this area that he naturally
misinterpreted so much because, of course, as I already pointed out in my part 1
presentation, if he was so misguided in making judgments regarding less technical
matters about SD Adventism, then it is plain that its here that he would certainly lack
true vision when dealing with high powered issues of prophecy and its symbolisms
involved.
2

I had purposefully left this area of my response for last, since it is the most technical,
and since its the area that Brother Lauriston spent most time condemning the SDA
Church over (simply because it is the heart of Adventism). Here in this part 2
presentation I intend to deal with his major questions raised and charges leveled at the
SDA Church, but suffice it to say here in passing, almost every major concern and charge
that Brother Thunder raised was already addressed in a booklet I had purposefully
written a few years ago to address those very concerns. I will therefore link you to it
(click this link), while I delve into my full response to Brother Thunder about what he
said on Hardtalk about Adventisms 1844 Investigative Judgment and Sanctuary
Messages.
Key Questions Raised by Brother Thunder about SDAs 1844 and Sanctuary Message:
Among the several questions raised and claims made by Brother Thunder in his TV
appearance are the following; questions and issues which I intend to address head-on
hereafter:
1.If the dead are first being judged before the living since 1844, yet people die daily,
then how will God ever reach the living and then close the Investigative Judgment and
Jesus returns the second time?
2. Isnt the notion of God scrutinizing every minutiae (small detail) of the lives of
Christians seriously antithetical to the gospel which teaches that all sins have already
been paid for by Jesus when he died on the Cross?
3. Didnt the renowned SDA scholar, Angel Manuel Rodriquez, indicate that there are
issues/problems with the SDA doctrine on the 1844 Investigative Judgment Message
when he said if we [SDAs] are wrong on this central pillar of SDA teaching then theres
no reason for the Movement to exist? Click the *link above to see more.
4. Didnt the renowned SDA historian/theologian/author, George Knight, indicate in his 2008
book, The Apocalyptic Vision and the Neutering of Adventism, that an investigative judgment
cannot be found in the Daniel 8:14 key text of SDAs, and didnt the late renowned SDA
theologian/editor, Raymond Cottrell, also systematically and exegetically debunk the SDA
teaching on the 1844 Investigative Judgment and Sanctuary, and hence render the key doctrine
of Adventism invalid? Click the *links above to see more.
5. What justifies the little horn symbol in Daniel 8 to be deemed the Papacy, or the Roman
Catholic Church? Click the *link above to read the online chapter in the Bible.
6. What justifies the trampled sanctuary in Daniel 8 not being the earthly Jewish one, but
instead the heavenly one?
3

7. What justifies the translation of the word cleansed (from the Hebrew sadaq or nisdaq)
in Daniel 8:14, when more modern translations use other renderings of the word and hence
deem cleansed in the KJV as an incorrect translation? Why do SDAs continue to use the
incorrect translation of the word, despite all this?
8. What principle in Daniel 8 would deem it necessary to interpret 2300 days as years?
9. Why would the 2300 days Daniel 8:14, but interpreted by SDAs as a 2300 years time span,
begin many centuries before the activities of the little horn power?
10. Why would the 2300 years time span seem to mean (according to SDA eschatology; or
doctrines dealing with final events) that the activities of the little horn power, interpreted by
SDAs as the Papacy, should have ended in 1844 when the sanctuary is cleansed, and yet that
power still runs unchecked in its activities against the heavenly sanctuary ever since 1844?
11. Why does the little horn power of Daniel 7 come from the fourth beast (or Rome), while
the little horn power of Daniel 8 comes from the second beast (or Greece), and yet is deemed
to be the same power of the Papacy which arose only out of Rome?
12. Isnt it the case that the 1844 Investigative Judgment Message of SDAs detract from the
ministry of Christ simply because his atonement for sinners was finished or completed on the
Cross, yet the SDAs teachings say the atonement continue after the Cross, and doesnt this
heresy, more than any other render Adventism an anti-Christian cult?
While the above 12 questions are not the only ones Brother Lauriston had asked, or could have
asked (based on the non-SDA critics he has read), I do think that in addressing the foregoing,
readers will be able to see on what grounds I declared that Brother Lauriston had indeed
bitten off more than he can chew, had misinterpreted so much about Adventisms teachings
on prophecy and the gospel, and had sadly allowed outsiders (critics) and inside dissidents to
mislead him about the Adventism he had once loved and labored intensely and selflessly for.
Time to revisit the charges of brother Lauriston, so here goes
SDAs Never Predicted Jesus Second Coming in 1844!!
As seen in the Hardtalk video, program host, Ian Boyne, and brother Thunder together agreed
that it was the Millerites, or the MULTI-DENOMINATIONAL group of Bible believers in
America who followed the Baptist preacher, William Miller, who together had thought that
Christ would have returned in 1844; not the SDA Church, which was only officially formed in
1863 (nearly 20 years after). Thus any impression that the public might have taken away from
the Hardtalk presentation, that SDAs were the ones to make this prediction, that misleading
notion must be dispelled from the outset before I even begin to treat with the 1844 prophetic
issues.
IT MUST BE UNDERSTOOD FROM THE OUTSET that since the SDA Church's official founding is dated to
be 1863 (as an official denomination), therefore the 1844 prediction of Jesus' second coming could
*NOT rightly be considered a prediction of SD Adventism, but rather that of the *MULTI4

DENOMINATIONAL Millerite movement of the 1840s. The Seventh-day Adventist Church (formed in
1863) has *NEVER predicted a DATE for the second Coming of Jesus or "Doomsday"!! NEVER!! During
the recent global brouhahas over certain failed "Doomsday" predictions, the RUMOR continued to be
banded about that the SDA Church was one of those organizations that, at one time, had also falsely
predicted a date (in 1844) for the Second Coming of Jesus!! It is time people be informed of the REAL
TRUTH about the matter (even some SDA members themselves are so misinformed; many of whom are
either weak in the faith, or never took the time to find out the REAL truth).

As indicated above, the officially named "SDA Church" was founded in *1863 and has NEVER,
EVER set a date for the coming of Jesus. THE *MULTI-DENOMINATIONAL "MILLERITE"
MOVEMENT OF THE 1840s DID SET A DATE FOR 1844. This mixed group of the 1840s, called
"the Millerites" (not a church denomination), consisted of Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians,
Episcopalians or Anglicans, Congregationalists, Lutherans, Dutch Reformers, Seventh-day
Baptists, Free Will Baptists, among others. That mixed group earlier thought that Jesus would
come in 1844, based on a SYMBOLIC prophecy that was *accurately calculated, but they
misunderstood the EVENT that was to have taken place that year. If any group was 'guilty' of
that misunderstanding it would have applied ALSO to the various church denominations all
those members came from (as above listed).
But after the disappointment of 1844, in the predicted date of Jesus' second Coming, those
initially *FROM that movement broke up and either went back to their specific Church
denominations (e.g. Baptists, Methodists, etc.), or formed several different and newly named
groups (e.g. the Church of God, Jehovahs Witnesses, among many others), some of which even
remained Sunday-keeping denominations, and which are today called Sunday "Adventists" (e.g.
the Adventist Christian Church); not the Sabbath-keeping SDA church formed LATER. One group
went back to fully study the Bible, and recognized the mistake of the earlier multidenominational mixed group of "Millerites", and they LATER formed the Sabbath-keeping "SDA
Church" in 1863 (having learned the lesson well that "no man knows the day nor the hour") and
they have NEVER done any date setting (i.e. GIVING A SPECIFIC YEAR!!) for "Doomsday" since
being officially formed in 1863!!! NEVER, EVER!!
But some may argue that it was the Adventist predecessors who made the prediction and so
SDAs formed in 1863 have questionable forefathers as their predecessors. If to be born out of a
previous movement that had certain misconceptions mean condemnation, then why do
Christians proudly accept their outgrowth from Judaism? Wasn't Judaism a movement which
(by way of either SOME or MOST of its adherents):
i] Rejected the very Messiah of Christianity (even today it does), and did not believe Jesus was
divine or even the Son of God, but wrongly felt the Messiah would just be a warrior king to
overthrow the Romans
ii] Practiced slavery and polygamy, and even often sunk into outright idolatry or worshiping of
pagan gods
iii] Practiced racial segregation despite they were to be the vehicle to convert all nations to the
true worship of Yahweh?

If it is that because one's predecessors had misconceptions this means that you being born out
of that movement should forever make you feel ashamed of and shackled by that movement's
misconceptions, then I guess Christianity itself being born out of Judaism, a religion which even
to this day is a strong opposing force to certain fundamental teachings of Christianity, should
forever be something that Christians are ashamed of!! But quite the contrary!! Christians do
believe that despite Judaism had certain misconceptions, and Judaism did make certain
mistakes, yet it was the movement or religion God used for very many centuries to accomplish
much in the unfolding drama of his salvation plan (AND GOD DID SO EVEN WHILE THEY MADE
MISTAKES, HAD CERTAIN MISCONCEPTIONS, AND WERE NOT PERFECT IN THEIR IDEOLOGY).
What object lessons can we learn and apply to the SDA movement growing out of the *multidenominational "Millerite" movement of the 1840s, which did have certain misconceptions?
Could it be that the "Millerites" were used to accomplish something many people either
overlook or miss? In next section (sub-heading) below I will reveal that to you, dear reader.
Keep reading, and be probably amazed to discover things you never thought of before!!

What Benefit was Derived from the 1844 Millerite Movement?

Why would God inspire a New Testament writer to consider SAMSON (of all persons) to be
listed among the "champions of faith" in Hebrews 11, among such greats as Jacob, Joseph,
Moses, David, etc.? Wasn't the life of Sampson sullied by much self-centeredness and going
after ungodly unions and self-pleasing? How then could he be considered a "champion of faith"
even while much of his life he was misguided? Simple. God's thoughts are often NOT our
thoughts, and the way God accomplishes his purposes sometimes baffles us!! God worked
mightily through Israel, an often backslidden and sometimes misguided religion, evidencing
that God often works through 'less than perfect' instruments to do much more than we might
think. This leads me to the issue of how God could have worked through movements and
people which, by our fallible reasoning, may not have been the 'best choice', and yet much was
still accomplished through them.
The Millerite Movement of the 1840s was one such movement, consisting of a wide cross
section of earnest and passionate MULTI-DENOMINAITONAL Christians (NOT JUST ONE
DENOMINATION). This body of mixed Christians rekindled the fire of passionate expectation of
the second coming (or second "Advent") of Jesus, after very many centuries of dormancy
among Christians (i.e. hardly any fervent preaching about the Second Coming for very many
years), and they blazed a trail of serious Bible study and earnest investigation of the end-time
prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation. For the very first time in Christian history since the
fourth century, Christians from all walks of life and from a wide cross section of denominations
banded together to proclaim the second coming of Jesus with the greatest urgency. And for the
6

first time in all of Church history they spent endless hours in Bible study to understand the
prophecies of Daniel that were "sealed" until "the time of end" (see Daniel 12:4, 9).
Even if the Millerites were misguided in one regard --- that of thinking that a certain TIME
prophecy of Daniel (that was to end in 1844) meant that Jesus would return--- yet they
brought serious focus to the book of Daniel that many had neglected for many centuries, and
they were certainly correct in calculating the time prophecy (from Daniel 8 and 9), even while
mistaken about the EVENT that was to occur in that year. Thus they prepared the way for SD
Adventists to discover what their later mission was to be...that of PROCLAIMING THE 1844
HOUR OF JUDGMENT IN THE LAST DAYS, AND BRINGING FOCUS TO A NEGLECTED BIBLE TRUTH,
i.e. THAT OF JESUS BEING OUR HIGH PRIEST AND JUDGE IN THE SANCTUARY ABOVE.
This scenario I just described reminds me of the how the people of Israel were misguided for
very many years of the TRUE NATURE of the Messiah that was to come, and how even the
disciples of Christ were misguided for a time about the mission of Jesus at his first coming, yet
Jesus used these misguided disciples to promulgate the gospel, and God earlier used Israel (no
matter how often misguided and often backslidden they may have been) to prepare the world
for the coming of his Son! With the foregoing now said, its time turn my attention to brother
Lauristons 2016 charges levelled at the SDA Church over these crucial end time matters.
Brother Lauristons Charges against Adventisms Prophetic Teachings are Not New
When brother Lauriston was an SDA preacher, ironically he himself made plain that these
charges which he has now levelled against the SDA Church are not new. See him saying so in
this video clip online and recognize that because they are not new, the SDA Church has had the
time to assess them and refute them time and time again. Its only a pity that he himself never
spent the time carefully looking at how the charges he levelled against Adventism, and the
concerns he raised, have been ALREADY debunked by scholars in Adventism. He seemed to
have spent more time reading the critics, and not equal or more time researching and reading
the SDA apologists. Its time for me to demonstrate what I mean by the charges being
debunked time and time again.
To FULLY understand what SDAs mean by The Investigative Judgment of 1844 taking place
in the Heavenly Sanctuary since that time, and how that date is arrived at, revisit my free
booklet already written to defend the doctrine, entitled The S.D.A. Sanctuary Message
Defended by Derrick Gillespie, and read from page 13 onwards. It is based on a solid SDA
teaching, I dare say, despite all the challenges, and it has been able to meet the charges time
and time again. For instance (in light of what brother Lauriston charged):
1. What justifies the translation of the word cleansed (from the Hebrew sadaq or
nisdaq) in Daniel 8:14, when more modern translations use other renderings of the word
7

and hence deem cleansed in the KJV as an incorrect translation? Why do SDAs continue to
use the incorrect translation of the word, despite all this?
ANSWER:
Of the over 25 translations I have looked up *16 of them translate the word as "cleansed". That
indicates that there is strength in that rendering; not a sectarian rape of Scripture as some
would like to think. In fact, as I wrote this booklet, heres a snapshot of the Daniel 8:14 text
from my laptop Bible-study software, showing nearly 10 versions using the word cleansed:
Daniel 8:14
(LXX+) G2532 CONJ V-AAI-3S G846 D-DSM G2193 PREP G2073 N-GSF G2532 CONJ
G4404 ADV G2250 N-NPF G1367 A-NPF G2532 CONJ G5145 A-NPF G2532 CONJ
[cleansed] G2511 V-FPI-3S G3588 T-NSN G40 A-NSN
(ABP+) AndG2532 he saidG2036 to him,G1473 UntoG2193 eveningG2073 andG2532 morningG4404 [3daysG2250
1two thousandG1367 2three hundred],G5145 andG2532 [3shall be cleansedG2511 1theG3588 2holy
place].G39
(ASV) And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings;
then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
(BBE) And he said to him, For two thousand, three hundred evenings and mornings; then the
holy place will be made clean.
(DRB) And he said to him: Unto evening and morning two thousand three hundred days: and
the sanctuary shall be cleansed.
(KJV) And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the
sanctuary be cleansed.
(RV) And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings; then
shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
(WEB) He said to me, To two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings. Then the
sanctuary will be cleansed.
(WEBA) He said to me, To two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings. Then the
sanctuary will be cleansed.

More importantly, let me hasten to say that the oldest translations of the Old Testament are
the second century B.C. Septuagint (LXX) and the Theodotion. Both render sadaq or nisdaq
with the Greek term, katharisthesetai (shall be cleansed). Those careful Hebrew scholars
(who themselves spoke Hebrew), and who lived only a few centuries after the time of Daniel,
believed that this was the best single Greek word with which to translate sadaq or
nisdaq. So cleanse is a perfectly acceptable word in Daniel 8:14 and Adventism's
preference for that rendering is in good company.
8

However sadaq or nisdaq, in its various verb forms, includes meanings far broader than
merely cleanse, and we have to also recognize them. Other renderings of the word, sadaq or
nisdaq, include:
Be consecrated
Be righted
Be restored to its rightful state
Be restored
Be declared right
Be justified
Be victorious
Be vindicated
Be made righteous
Be sanctified
Now with that in mind, we can proceed with the thought that, as I have argued in my booklet
defending the Sanctuary Message, despite the word "cleansed" is correctly used by Adventism,
there is nothing wrong with applying the other uses, like "restored to its rightful place",
"righted", "vindicated", etc., since THERE IS NOTHING IN THE PROPHECY NECESSARILY LIMITING
THE MEANING TO ONLY THE "CLEANSING" OF WHICHEVER SANCTUARY IT HAPPENS TO BE AT
THE END OF THE 2300 YEARS (AT THE END OF THE EVENTS IN THE VISION OF DANIEL 8-9).
Why? I strongly believe that there is ample evidence that the prophecy might just have had
both the Heavenly sanctuary and the earthly spiritual temple (the Church) in mind, i.e. BOTH
relate to Gods people, and BOTH would be "cleansed", but just from different things.
Both would be made victorious or vindicated, but in different contexts. The symbolic trampling
of the sanctuary and God's people underfoot, and the symbolic casting down of the "place" of
God's sanctuary and His truth to the ground, ARE SIMPLY SYMBOLS FOR, ON THE ONE HAND,
THE DEFILEMENT OF THE CHURCH (THE SPIRITUAL TEMPLE) BY THE PRESENCE AND PAGAN
INFLUENCE OF THE ANTICHRIST POWER, THE PAPACY (2 THESS. 2:4), AND ALSO THE
OBSCURING OF THE TRUTH ABOUT THE RIGHTFUL PLACE OF GOD'S HEAVENLY SANCTUARY
AND TRUE HIGH PRIEST (OR ONLY MEDIATOR) IN THE LIVES OF CHRISTIANS AFTER THE ROMAN
ANTICHRIST CAME ON THE SCENE.
Thus both sanctuaries would simultaneously (in the same time period; i.e. at the end of the
2300 years) be "made right", "made victorious", and "vindicated", as the truth is made clear
again to the world. Thus while the Heavenly sanctuary is being "cleansed" in the anti-typical
Judgment sense of Leviticus 16 and Yom Kippur, and "vindicated" too, so too the earthly
spiritual temple (the Church) is being "cleansed" (in another context) of pagan defilement, and
9

"vindicated" too, as the "Remnant" leaves the confused ranks of spiritual Babylon in
Christendom (since the spiritual awakening of the modern era) and restores the truth about
God's true apostolic Church, God's law, Sabbath, state of the dead, etc. This all happens while
God is "sealing" his chosen elect (making up his jewels) once and for all, thus pronouncing them
"vindicated" and their sinful record fully forgiven or blotted out, to the chagrin of Satan, "the
accuser of the brethren".
That discovery, while prayerfully contemplating the Word, has been the impression of the Holy
Spirit of prophecy upon my spirit. Spiritual things are spiritually discerned and I don't need high
powered learning about exegesis, and textual analysis (as brother Lauriston seem to think),
before the Holy Spirit can impress such things upon my spirit. I however I think that careful
textual analysis should be used to later intellectually CONFIRM what was discerned in the spirit
and heart (since there are indeed demonic spirits of false prophecy), but the Bible does give me
enough evidence to think this way.
This now brings me to the issue of why do SDAs interpret the 2300 days in Daniel 8:14 to be
years, and not literal days? Brother Lauriston had asked:
2. What principle in Daniel 8 would deem it necessary to interpret 2300 days as years?

ANSWER:
The designation of time in Daniel 8:14 occurs in the midst of symbols - where all is symbolic
language - the beasts, the horns, the little horn, and the trampling, and casting down of truth,
Gods people and the place of Gods sanctuary by such a power, etc.; and it would seem to be
much more probable that the symbolic method would be adopted as designating the time
referred to than a literal method. Why take out one aspect of the vision which is all symbolic,
and make it literal even before the symbols are explained? Thats not consistent. In addition,
considering that the question in Daniel 8:13 asked specifically, HOW LONG THE VISION, or
UNTIL WHEN SHALL BE THE VISION, and that vision started in the time of the Medo-Persian
empire (symbolized by the ram), and considering that we also see the scope of the vision
leading up to the time of the Grecian empire (symbolized by the he-goat), a time span covering
several centuries, then the time element for the length of the vision could not be 2300
days, when interpreted, but rather a long span of time, and logically called for years to be
understood by the symbol of 2300 days. Pages 9-10 of my booklet, The S.D.A. Sanctuary
Message Defended by Derrick Gillespie, already delved into the potency of why the contents of
the Daniel 8-9 vision (singular) is proven to have related to even Jesus time on earth, and
hence satisfies the question as to why the 2300 days should be years.
The above described also would answer Brother Lauristons next question which asked:
3. Why would the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14, but interpreted by SDAs as a 2300 years time
span, begin many centuries before the activities of the little horn power?
ANSWER: Many critics of the SDA interpretation of Daniel 8:14 prophecy (like Dale Ratzlaff,
10

Desmond Ford, Raymond Cottrell, et al), fall prey to the same lack of insight, in my humble
opinion. None of these critics have ever disproven the SDA understanding that the question
being answered by Daniel 8:14 was literally asking "HOW LONG THE VISION?" or "UNTIL
WHEN IS THE VISION?" They have never disproven that (according to the SDA viewpoint)
ONLY *ONE GENERAL VISION WAS IN VIEW (not two), and that the time period, as
*SYMBOLICALLY presented in vision (i.e. presented as 2300 evening morning, but
translated by Jews themselves in the Septuagint and Theodotion as prophetic days), that it
applies to the TIME SCOPE of the entire vision which Daniel got in Daniel 8; not just the
aspects itemized as samples of that vision in Daniel 8:13. Thats why 2300 years MUST be the
proper interpretation, and the entire vision therefore logically started in the Medo-Persian era,
and explains why 457 B.C is valid as the starting point, and, ultimately, why the vision started
long before the Romans and the Papacy came on the scene.
If any element of that vision runs into or find fulfillment in the period when Rome was the
desolator of Israel (as Jesus showed plainly in Matthew 24:15), then we know that the vision
of Daniel, involving a certain desolating power, did not end with Greece, neither was the
Grecian king Antiochus Epiphanes the real power that would bring in the abomination
[transgression] of desolation, as mistakenly thought to be so by the critics (including dissident
insiders like Desmond Ford and Raymond F. Cottrell, and the former SDA Dale Ratzlaff, which
brother Thunder Lauriston has chosen to read, and not also, it would seem, his own SDA
apologists). Kings in symbol mean whole kingdoms; not one person, like Antiochus Epiphanes.
Thats a major problem for the critics who want to make the little horn in Daniel 8, which
grew large/immensely, and brought desolation to Israel, into one person, Antiochus. Yet
Antiochus never desolated the temple, since it was left standing, and he never desolated
Israel, since the nation, via the Maccabees, rose up in rebellion and chased him away
(certainly not a kingdom which waxed exceedingly great in Israels direction, nor greatly
prospered as a power, nor destroyed wonderfully; Daniel 8:9, 12, 24).
In addition, Jesus Matthew 24:15 utterance is a major obstacle to the opposing view of the
critics; an obstacle which they must overturn before they can effectively refute the SDA
position on who was the desolating power of Daniel 8 and 9, for instance. ABSOLUTELY NO
ONE HAS YET BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED!! AND I AM SPEAKING
WITH ABSOLUTE HONESTY WHEN I SAY SO. Until they can, then the SDA viewpoint remains
valid.
With the foregoing considered, this now leads me to answer the questions from Brother
Lauriston which asked:
4. Why does the little horn power of Daniel 7 come from the fourth beast (or Rome), while
the little horn power of Daniel 8 comes from the second beast (or Greece), and yet it is
deemed by SDAs to be the same power of the Papacy which arose out of Rome? [And]What
justifies the little horn symbol in Daniel 8 being deemed to be the Papacy, or the Roman
Catholic Church?
ANSWER:
As already explained in my booklet, The S.D.A. Sanctuary Message Defended by Derrick
Gillespie, the fact that Jesus in Matthew 24:15 and Luke 21:20 IDENTIFIED the power bringing
11

"*THE abomination [transgression] of desolation" to be Rome, totally obliterates the popular

viewpoint that Antiochus Epiphanes (a Syrian king) fulfilled "THE" (specific article)
"abomination of desolation" that was prophesied by Daniel. I repeat. Antiochus never brought
"desolation", neither to the temple (since he left it standing), nor to Jerusalem (it remained in
place), nor to Israel (since the Jews rose up in successful rebellion against the invasion of
Antiochus, by way of the Maccabees)!! And so he cannot be the REAL agent of "desolation"
(since he brought only *temporary *disruption to Israels temple services), but rather the REAL
power in view was the empire of Rome which came nearly 200 years later! Once Rome appears
in the picture as bringing the fulfillment of "THE" (specific article) related "transgression
[abomination] of desolation" prophecies of Daniel 8 and 9, then it makes it plain that the
time frame of the vision of Daniel 8 and 9 was to run into a long time period represented in
symbol as "2300 days" (but with the day-for-a-year prophetic principle in operation in
order for that to happen). In fact, the very fact that Revelation 13, and 17 pictures IN SYMBOL
a Roman power with the "body of a leopard", i.e. it being largely characteristic of the
features of the Grecian power that it came after (remember Greece was the leopard power in
symbol; Daniel 7), this totally nullifies all those opposing viewpoints which believe that a
Roman "little horn" power could not have arisen out of a Grecian empire depicted in Daniel
8. All notable history books depict Rome as a "Greco-Roman" empire, simply because it was
so "Greek" at its core in so many ways.... and this is very telling of what Daniel saw in vision
long before Rome came on the scene, especially with Jesus himself identifying Rome in
Matthew 24:15 as the real power fulfilling the "abomination of desolation" prophecies of
Daniel.
By the way, the he-goat power (representing Greece) that brother Lauriston called the second
beast on Hardtalk would actually be the third beast power in the general scheme of the
sequence of word powers prophesied about from Babylon onwards. This third beast power
actually morphed/transitioned into the fourth beast, or Rome, because Rome in history is called
by all reputable historians as the *Greco-Roman power (fancy that!!!). And in the prophecies
of Revelation 13, Rome, by the times of the New Testament, is depicted as a beast (kingdom)
with a body (the largest portion of any animal) being that of a leopard (which in Daniel 7 had
represented Greece). Therefore, the Papacy (the religo-political continuation of pagan Rome)
indeed rose from a power largely Greek at its core (i.e. the Greco-Roman power). This
satisfies the question as to why the little horn (Papal Rome), in either its pagan or papal
stages, could have been depicted as arising from BOTH a Roman as well as an earlier Grecian
power!!

So far, I have been showing, one by one, how the charges/concerns of brother Lauriston are
groundless in terms of the prophetic issues, and I will continue to do so right to the very end.
Heres his next question:
5. Why would the 2300 years time span seem to mean (according to SDA eschatology; or
doctrines dealing with final events) that the activities of the little horn power, interpreted
by SDAs as the Papacy, should have ended in 1844 when the sanctuary is cleansed, and yet
that power still runs unchecked in its activities against the heavenly sanctuary ever since
1844?
12

ANSWER:
The answer is simple. Because the 2300 days question related to the length of the entire vision
(Daniel 8:13); not the time span the little horn would be casting down the place of the
sanctuary, by obscuring its work. When the 2300 years (represented in symbol as 2300 days)
or the length of the vision would have expired, nowhere does the Bible say the little horn
power would not have continued to run its course until the time of the the end; a time which
began from Jesus time (denoted the last days; see Dan. 8:17), and continues up to Jesus
second coming when the little horn power (the Papacy) is broken without hand or
destroyed by divine intervention (Daniel 8:25; 2 Thess. 2:8). The time of Antiochus is never
designated the time of the end or the end times, but the time-span of Rome (pagan and
papal) is indeed within the time of the end.
Brother Lauriston also asked:
6. What justifies the trampled sanctuary in Daniel 8 not being the earthly Jewish one, but
instead the heavenly one?
ANSWER:
Please note that the sanctuary to be cleansed at the end of the 2300 years period of the
entire vision (i.e. in 1844)--- a time certainly within the time of the end--- could NOT have
been the earthly Jewish sanctuary, because by then it was no longer in existence (it was
destroyed by the desolating power of Rome since A.D. 70), and so the only candidates for that
post-1844 cleansing could only be the heavenly one and the church as the spiritual one. Its in
the heavenly sanctuary that we see a judgment scene in Daniel 7:9, 10; an investigative
judgment on the little horn power which later results in it power being broken/destroyed
thereafter. Thus, when we see that the only true sanctuary still in existence to be cleansed at
the end of the length of the time span of the entire vision (Daniel 8:13), or after 1844, is the
heavenly one intimately tied to the earthly spiritual temple of the Church, by that alone we
know that the heavenly sanctuary tied to the church (the spiritual sanctuary on earth) would be
the real focus of the vision of Daniel 8; a vision running from the Medo-Persian era to the time
of the end (see Daniel 8:17). Never forget that the earthly temple was NOT the true
tabernacle (see Heb. 8:1-2 with Heb. 9:24), but just the symbol of the heavenly one, as tied to
Gods people, the spiritual temple. That TRUE temple is the one Satan hates most!!
Dear reader, by now I am hoping you have begun to see that the SDA beliefs about prophecy
can be defended, so its time for me to address the opposition coming from dissident SDA
insiders like late Dr. Raymond Cottrell, Dr. Desmond Ford, and from defectors like Dale Ratzlaff.
Brother Lauriston indirectly asked these questions:
7. Didnt the renowned SDA historian/theologian/author, George Knight, indicate in his 2008
book, The Apocalyptic Vision and the Neutering of Adventism, that an investigative
judgment cannot be found in the Daniel 8:14 key text of SDAs, and didnt the late renowned
SDA theologian/editor, Raymond Cottrell, also systematically and exegetically debunk the
SDA teaching on the 1844 Investigative Judgment and Sanctuary, and hence render the key
doctrine of Adventism invalid?
13

ANSWER: First, it must be noted that brother Lauriston insisted on Hardtalk that the
renowned SDA historian/theologian/author, George Knight, flatly rejected any investigative
judgment in Daniel 8:14. Yet, he, just like former member Dr. Andre Hill (who publicly made
the same claim) seem to have missed the statements from George Knights 2008 book, The
Apocalyptic Vision and the Neutering of Adventism, clearly saying what he didnt see in Daniel
8:14 was an investigative Judgment OF THE SAINTS but rather [investigative and executive]
Judgment on the little horn, and a restoration, justification, and cleansing of the sanctuary at
the end of the 2300 days. But since Scripture must be studied line upon line; precept upon
precept; here a little, there a little, it is no problem to explain one Scripture like Daniel 8:14 by
linking it to another, such as the parallel thought being expressed in Daniel 7:9, 10. Having read
this 2008 book myself, and since I own it, let me share a snapshot of the very page (page 68)
which brother Lauriston was quoting from on Hardtalk. Read it and recognize what George
Knight is saying; Ill outline those below.

George Knight, like myself, recognize that the only true sanctuary remaining after the 2300
years time span (which began in the Medo-Persian era and ended in 1844), is the heavenly
one; and only that true sanctuary could be cleansed in a the fashion typified by the Jewish
one which had long passed away. And since Hebrews 9:23 makes plain that the heavenly
sanctuary can and would be purified (or cleansed), contrary to some who think this could
never be, then it is no strange thing for that to happen metaphorically after 1844. Also since, to
the Jews, the earthly Day of Atonement or Yom Kippur (Leviticus 16) was the only temple
ceremony that involved temple purification or cleansing that is intimately/simultaneously
tied to a day of Judgment or examination of all lives before God (whether bad or good), then
right way we begin to see the link between Daniel 8:14 and Daniel 7:9, 10. We also begin to see
why George Knight linked the two Scriptures. By doing all of this, including defending the I844
doctrine in the above-mentioned book, George Knight shows that Dr. Raymond Cottrell and Dr.
14

Desmond Ford are misguided. I also personally think that these two renowned SDA theologians
were/are misguided, and I say that after carefully reading Dr. Desmond Fords renowned
Glacier View papers, as well as the Asset or Liability paper of Dr. Raymond Cottrell (which
brother Thunder referenced), and seeing for myself the inherent flaws therein despite all their
scholarship. Scholarship and intellect does not automatically mean one must be correct!!!
Never forget that the Jews themselves have long seen Yom Kippur (the day of atonement in
Leviticus 16) as closely tied to a day of investigative judgment (see Yom Kippur online at this
link: http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/15117-yom-kippur).
The Jewish Encyclopedia I cited at the link above puts it this way:
"In rabbinic Judaism the Day of Atonement [Yom Kippur] completes the penitential period of
ten days...[with] the annual day of judgment, when all creatures pass in review before the
searching eye of Omniscience..."
This Jewish understanding is in reality quite ironic, seeing that just as Daniel 7 shows a
vindication of God's people AFTER a judgment scene (obviously occurring in the heavenly
temple above where God dwells), and AFTER an event which results in the "little horn" power's
ultimate demise (Daniel 7:9, 10, 26, 27), LIKEWISE Daniel 8 also brings into focus a "cleansing"
of the only remaining LITERAL sanctuary at the very time of "the end" (i.e. the sanctuary
above), and that too results in the "little horn" power being "broken without hand". With this
evident parallelism SDAs firmly believe that the heavenly ceremony of "cleansing" is also one of
investigative judgment that looks into the records of people's lives, and determines their final
destinies and rewards, just as the Jews believed about the earthly shadow or counterpart
(the Day of Atonement) was a time of divine investigation of the lives of the people of God.
How can the above described connection, as made by SDAs (and Jews), be Biblically supported?
Heres how. God has appointed ONLY ONE "day", or event, or period (not more than one), for
*JUDICIALLY judging/assessing *BOTH the wicked and the righteous *BEFORE Jesus second
coming to establish his glorious kingdom and punish the wicked (see Acts 17:31, 2 Cor. 5:10
with Ecclesiastes 3:17). When Jesus returns he would have rewards for all (Rev.22:12), including
the judicial punishment of the anti-Christ power in 2 Thess. 2:8, and hence THIS JUDGMENT OF
ASSESSMENT MUST TAKE PLACE WITHIN THE TIME OF "THE END" BUT BEFORE JESUS RETURNS
(see Revelation 11:1, 18, 19 roughly locating that investigative event in the period when the
nations are angry, i.e. in the period involving World Wars for the first time, or after the 1844
date). From the prophecy of Daniel 8:14, SDAs have learned that when the prophetic period
covered by the entire vision of Daniel 8 (see again Daniel 8:13) is complete (expressed in
symbolic language as "2300 days", but symbolically meaning years) then an event of sanctuary
"cleansing" would take place, and would also be a period of divine Judgment in heaven (the
same one identified in Daniel 7:9-11); one that is "Investigative" in nature, and that would
result in not just the demise of the opposing little horn power, but also a judging and
vindication of God's people by way of their Advocate and High Priest (Jesus Christ) at his
throne. This is what "1844" is all about (the year that ends the period covered by the singular
vision of Daniel 8 and 9), and it has a more solid footing in the Bible than the critics do realize.
15

HOW MUCH CLEARER COULD JOHN THE REVELATOR SEE THE TRUTH IN VISION (IN REVELATION 11:1, 18,19) THAT THE
JUDGMENT/ASSESSMENT OF ALL IS ALSO TIED TO THE OPENING OF THE MOST HOLY PLACE AND THE ARK OF THE
COVENANT BEING SHOWN? ONLY ON THE DAY OF ATONEMENT OR YOM KIPPUR WAS THE INNER APARTMENT OF THE
TEMPLE VIEWED BY THE HIGH PRIEST, AND YET HERE IS JOHN SHOWING THE HEAVENLY COUNTERPART, AND ITS INNER
SANCTUM BEING SYMBOLICALLY "OPENED", AND THAT BEING TIED TO A DAY OF JUDGMENT ON ALL.

I think that is rather telling, and gives credence to the Jewish Rabbinical view that Yom Kippur is
also tied to judgment/assessment of peoples lives. Is it any wonder John the Revelator also ties
the opening of the Most Holy Place with the "TIME" APPOINTED (SEE AGAIN ACTS 17:31) for
judging ALL people of earth in Revelation 11: 18,19, INCLUDING GOD'S OWN PEOPLE? To those
too blind to see it will not be obvious, but the SD Adventists have long seen the connection
and will continue to preach it no matter the fierce opposition from within and without the
Church.
Some assume that because the book of Hebrews does not specifically address the prophetic
issue of the sanctuary "cleansing", then it denies the "INVESTIGATIVE JUDGMENT" doctrine as
understood by SDAs, but that is a paltry polemic against the SDA teaching since Hebrews was
*NOT a book meant to explain prophetic issues in detail, but it simply gave a sweeping view of
how Jesus ministers in THE true heavenly sanctuary (AS BOTH THE SACRIFICIAL "LAMB" AND
PRIEST, INCLUDING BEING THE DAILY ANTI-TYPICAL PRIEST AS WELL AS HIGH PRIEST), and that,
no doubt, ALL the earthly symbols/figures in the earthly sanctuary would eventually find
fulfillment in the ongoing ministry of Jesus in the heavenly one (ALL IN THEIR OWN TIME, OF
COURSE).

Behind the Veil and all that!!

Brother Lauriston was clearly concerned on Hardtalk that Adventism stands alone against all
of Christendom teaching that Jesus entry within [behind] the veil in the heavenly sanctuary
must mean (as Dr. Desmond Ford postulated) that Jesus must have been dealing with matters
related to the Most Holy Place or engaged in an ongoing day of Atonement ever since his
ascension. And yet here, again, the flaws in the arguments of the critics which brother
Thunder has read can be shown.
The Bible itself has proven the opposing voices (obligated to bring the 'burden of proof') to not
be convincing enough in the following areas:
a] The book of Hebrews gives no absolute proof that Jesus has been serving within the second
apartment of the heavenly sanctuary, or that he carried out the full/complete work
symbolized by that apartment) ever since his ascension (or before 1844), and the term
"within the veil" in the book of Hebrews, BEING AMBIGUOUS IN NATURE, offers no absolute
refutation of the Sanctuary Message as taught by SDAs. The term within the veil I will
expound on shortly to show why it is indeed ambiguous. This issue I will demonstrate and
expound on hereafter (citing how even the opposing inside scholars like even Desmond Ford
unwittingly proves how ambiguous the term "the veil" really is). But suffice it to say here that it
is true that Jesus ascended to the very presence of His Father, but his work as both the Lamb,
our Advocate (Priest) and High Priest cannot be proven (despite all the protestations of the
critics) as being without natural phases and or happening within its own timetable. The SDA
teaching about Jesus being in Gods very presence even while his work is undergoing phases
16

can be easily accounted for. In heaven there is no sinful being or person, and so there is no
need to separate heavens inhabitants (including angels) from Gods direct presence, as
necessary on earth among the ancient Jews in the earthly temple services. Angels (sinless
beings) freely have full access to the throne room of God, and they stand in his very presence
daily (see Matt. 18:10, Luke 1:19 and Rev. 5:11); unlike sinful humans on earth who were/are
separated from him because of our sinful nature. And even though Jesus remains a human, a
glorified human (see 1 Tim. 2:5), yet because of his inherent divine nature (Heb. 1:8) as well
as his spotlessness or sinless condition as our Advocate he, like all the other inhabitants of
heaven, has direct access to the very throne room of God as well as to Gods very enthroned
presence. Actually Jesus shares the very throne of God (Rev. 3:21). However it is quite
interesting that in Revelation 8:3, Rev. 1:4 and Rev. 4:5 the presence of the heavenly alter
and the symbolic seven branched lamp (representing the Holy Spirit) is seen directly BEFORE
(literally 'in front of') the Throne of God and the Lamb (the same throne as in Rev. 3:21). ON
EARTH THIS "LAMP" AND THE ALTER WAS IN THE FIRST APARTMENT OF THE SANCTUARY (A
PATTERN OF THE HEAVENLY SANCTUARY)!! And this is compelling evidence for me and other
doctrinally settled SDAs that John's visions of Heaven before the arrival of the pre-Advent
Judgment scene (of Rev. 11:18, 19 or Daniel 7: 9, 10) seem to place God's MOVEABLE throne in
the first apartment of the Heavenly sanctuary; I say moveable throne because that is
certainly why in visionary symbol it has wheels, and why God in Daniel 7: 9, 10 is represented
in vision as seemingly coming in from elsewhere to sit in Judgment and thereafter examine
the records of human lives (i.e. both the wicked and the righteous; see Eccl. 3:17).
All of this biblical reality, as outlined in the foregoing, certainly allows for MOVEMENT of both
God the Father and His throne through the two sanctuary-apartment phases of Jesus heavenly
ministry as believed by SDAs!! There is certainly implied a clear movement of focus in terms
of what is being accomplished in heaven when the scene in Daniel 7:9, 10 and Rev. 11:18, 19
arrives!! For nearly two thousand years now Jesus has been doing a work of Advocacy as our
Mediator in the heavenly sanctuary (Heb. 8:1-6) as himself the Sacrificial Lamb, himself the
daily Priest (Mediator) and himself the High Priest as well. Why?
Since Hebrews 8:1-6 shows that the normal daily priests and their daily services serve unto
the example and shadow of heavenly things, then Jesus as Advocate (Priest)*MUST carry out
heavenly work typified by the normal daily priests as well (see Heb. 8:4, 5), and not just the
High Priests distinctive one-day work at the climax of the year of all temple activities. That is
why I reject the views of those (like the dissident insider Desmond Ford) who say Jesus
ascended to only accomplish the distinctive work of the High Priest as carried out only on the
Day of Atonement. If that was the case then the normal earthly priests and their daily round
of services, and even the normal daily work of the high priest himself as seen in Heb. 7:27
(even going into the first apartment with blood for sins; and Lev. 4:7, 17, 18), these would
have no counterpart in heaven itself (in contradistinction to Heb. 8:4, 5); only the distinctive
one-day or Yom Kippur work of the High Priest would find fulfillment (according to Desmond
Ford misguided claims). But we see Jesus carrying out BOTH roles, but obviously in two
phases as typified repeatedly on earth by the repeated yearly cycles of temple services in the
outer and inner apartment (see Heb. 10:1-12). Jesus in Heaven fulfills the repeated yearly
rounds of activities carried out by both the daily priests and the High Priest as well. He does
this by one sacrifice of himself as the Lamb on earth, by one entry as the human priest into
17

the heavenly sanctuary, by one ongoing period of advocacy as Mediator, as typified by the
daily priests (and the high priest as well), and he climaxes that one heaven-centered cycle
(singular) of activities, or the one period covering the process of redemption/atonement,
with one special occasion (typified by the day of Atonement) with himself also being the High
Priest. Most critics fail to appreciate that the PROCESS of atonement, as typified by
shadows on earth, was one carried out throughout the year (including the work of the
normal priests with the daily atonement sacrifices); not just in its climaxing phase on the
special day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) when the High Priest did a distinctive climaxing work
of atonement. As on earth with the earthly sanctuary, so it MUST unfold in heaven as a
process over time, and in phases, or else the shadows on earth would find no counterpart
in heaven as the book of Hebrews explains!! These truths I find gripping and cannot ignore,
despite all the rantings of the critics.
I also find it very gripping that only when the pre-Advent Judgment "TIME" was introduced in
Rev. 11:18, 19 (i.e. "the TIME of determining rewards and punishments BEFORE Jesus
returns with all rewards; see Rev. 22:12) that John made reference to the Ark of the
Covenant FOUND IN THE INNER APARTMENT (a container for holding the main moral
standards which even the saints will be judged by; see James 2:10-12; 1 Kings 8:9) thus
strongly indicating that the inner apartment of the heavenly was figuratively opened for
business, in a manner of speaking, ONLY when the INVESTIGATIVE Judgment arrived (which
did not cover the whole Christian era, but a specifically appointed time- Acts 17:31). The
above cited references, such as Rev. 11:18, 19 and Acts 17:31, et al, I will further explain
hereafter to show their potency.
b] Critics cannot disprove the SDA viewpoint that Jesus ascended to heaven to relate to the
entire heavenly sanctuary and its services as typified on earth in the earthly sanctuary; not
just to relate to the inner apartment and its one item of furniture, the Ark of the Covenant.
Jesus actually ascended and does/did a work related to all aspects, but in unfolding phases.
Proof? Hebrews 8:2, 5 and Hebrews 9:18-24 make plain (in the KJV and many other
translations) that Christ was to relate to ALL the "PATTERNS" AND "THINGS" (PLURAL) IN
"HEAVEN ITSELF", and not just one room of the Most Holy place, and its one item, the Ark of
the covenant (BOTH SINGULAR SUBJECTS). Jesus is pictured as entered into heaven itself and
into a place patterning the "holy places" (Hebrews 9:24) on earth, or he entered once into
the sanctuary as a whole (Hebrews 8:2), and this sanctuary is also called the holy place
(Hebrew 9:12) or ta hagia in Greek. IT WAS THE ENTIRE EARTHLY SANCTUARY THAT HAD ALL
THE ITEMS "WHICH *ARE FIGURES [OR PATTERNS] OF THE TRUE", and this indicates that
where Jesus started to serve as its counterpart "IN HEAVEN ITSELF" it has ALL THE PROTOTYPE
"PATTERNS" [PLURAL] of the earthly sanctuary; not just the one room of the Most Holy place
being a pattern (singular), as the true prototype.
By the very reference to "FIGURES/PATTERNS" of the true, and to Jesus entering "HEAVEN
itself" these expressions indicate that the place Jesus started to serve upon his ascension was
filled with "FIGURES" OR "PATTERNS" [PLURAL]. No wonder Hebrews 9:23, when written in the
first century, makes plain that it should be [future tense] all "THINGS" (PLURAL) in the
heavenly sanctuary that should be (not have been but *SHOULD be) SYMBOLICALLY
18

"purified" with Jesus blood; NOT JUST THE ONE ROOM OF THE MOST HOLY PLACE, AND NOT
JUST THE ONE ITEM OF FURNISHING IN IT (SINGULAR). The very language of Hebrews 9:23,24
makes plain Jesus was to serve in the entire heavenly sanctuary with all it "PATTERNS"
(PLURAL); he was not just to serve in relation to one room, or one item of furnishing, but IN
RELATION TO PLURAL SUBJECTS AND "THINGS" OR "PATTERNS". In addition to this, the very
reference to purification of heavenly things and patterns refutes the claim that nothing
defiling can be in heaven. Its clearly symbolic language at play, and so SDAs are on firm
foundation to refer to symbolic cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary in our Sanctuary
Message. But the main point here is that Hebrews 9 makes sweeping descriptions of the
overall temple and priestly services and ceremonies, and points to the heavenly ministry of
Christ as their counterpart; Hebrews 9 is not just about the special event on the special Day of
Atonement (Yom Kippur).
DR FORD STANDS REFUTED
Many critics and dissident insiders alike, e.g. Dr. Desmond Ford, they forget that the work
of the normal daily priests (not just the High Priest) must find fulfillment in Jesus
heavenly/sanctuary ministry, and they also forget that the High priest on earth served right
throughout the year in the earthly temple AS A WHOLE (e.g. Lev. 4:7, 17, 18); not just on the
one day he entered the Most Holy place annually. If these earthly realities or shadows must
find fulfillment in Jesus life/work in heaven, then it stands to reason that Jesus is to serve
BOTH as a normal priest would in the heavenly sanctuary (no wonder his priesthood has been
for nearly 2000 years so far), as well as serve as the High Priest would daily, as well as in the
shorter period covered by the final segment of ministry in the Most Holy Place. Hebrews
overall, especially Hebrews 9, proves that his heavenly ministry (involving BOTH his roles AS
THE SACRIFICED LAMB AND OUR HEAVENLY PRIEST) ignores no aspect of the earthly temple as
a whole, with all its "PATTERNS" OR "FIGURES" (PLURAL). I dont know of any critic that could
take that understanding away from me!!
The dissident SDA insider, Dr. Desmond Ford, tried in several of his scholarly papers, to make
it seem that because Hebrews 9 refers to Jesus as High Priest entering the holiest of all or
serving within the veil, and because reference is made to bulls or bullocks and calves,
and goats, and to Jesus as high priest entering once into the holy place, then this must
mean only the special shadows of the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) activities would
characterize his ministry in the heavenly sanctuary from the very moment he ascended. This, he
argues, would involve only the most holy place phase of the work of Jesus as priest, and
hence would effectively nullify the SDA Sanctuary Message of a two-phased or twoapartment ministry of Jesus and its related date of 1844. But I find this to be unconvincing
eisogesis (reading into the text) on his part, and I cannot but reject his well-intended but
misguided claims (no matter how scholarly they may sound coming from a highly respected
intellectual; scholarship and intellect does not automatically mean one must be correct).
19

Apart from what I showed earlier, here are additional points to refute his claims regarding the
above described:
[i] The expression holiest of all in Hebrew 9:8 (a reference to the entire sanctuary in heaven)
is NOT exactly the same Greek expression used in Hebrews 9:3; despite also translated as the
holiest of all in the KJV. The writer of Hebrews simply made the point in Hebrews 9:8 that
while the earthly sanctuary was still standing, or fully functional, the way into the heavenly
sanctuary or ta hagia (translated as the holiest of all in the KJV) was not yet manifest, i.e.
Jesus was not yet operating as priest in the heavenly sanctuary during the old testament age.
He first had to become human to become the priest in the heavenly sanctuary, and also had to
have a perfect blood sacrifice to offer, in this case it would be himself, before his ministry above
in the ta hagia or true tabernacle (also called the holiest of all) could begin. In contrast,
we find that when the writer of Hebrews wanted to clinch a more specific meaning, i.e. with
specific reference to the most holy place as the second apartment in the sanctuary as a
whole (which is also called the holiest of all in the KJV), he used the compound Greek
expression hagia hagion, or hagia hagia, to specifically mean the holy of holies or inner
apartment of the sanctuary!! Thus we cannot just read the English expression holiest of all
(translated from the Greek ta hagia) and assume it automatically means the most holy
place specifically, simply because the expression ta hagia is AMBIGUOUS, and Dr. Desmond
Ford himself unwittingly admits this, when he said (while quoting from a newer and misleading
translation):
"[Hebrews 9:12] He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves, but he entered the
most holy place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption.
.... the word [ta hagia] that is here translated "most holy place" is literally "holies." .....The word
itself can mean the sanctuary as a whole, or it can mean the first apartment, or it can mean
the second apartment. You can prove nothing from the Greek, because it has these
possibilities..."
-Desmond Ford, The Investigative Judgment: Theological Milestone or Historical Necessity?
Here Desmond Ford, a staunch critic of Adventism's doctrine of the Sanctuary, admits freely,
and rightly so, that the plural term "holies", sometimes translated "holy place", other times
"holy places" (coming from "ta hagion" or "ta hagia" in Greek) is *AMBIGUOUS, and at times it
means the sanctuary as a whole, sometimes the outer apartment, and other times the inner
apartment, so it is CONTEXT that must be appealed to in order to ascertain meaning. This
ambiguity of the Greek word is similar to the AMBIGUOUS word "law" in the Bible (from the
Hebrew "torah", or the Greek "nomos"), and hence context is crucial. Now, interestingly, I
found out (by doing a careful review of the Greek), that all places where it is claimed that Jesus
"entered" [PAST TENSE] into the Most Holy Place into the presence of the Father is based on
20

speculation, because THE EXPRESSION COMPLEX, "HAGIA HAGION" IS MISSING!! The

expression used about Christ in the sanctuary in the presence of the Father is always "hagion"
or "ta hagia", which means simply either Heaven itself, or just the sanctuary on a whole (e.g.
Heb. 9:8, and Heb. 10:19). Coupled with that is the fact that in the KJV Jesus is said to have
"entered" into "the holy place" (singular) in Hebrews 9:12 and into "holy places" (plural) in
Hebrews 9:24, with both expressions coming from ta hagia. This further MAKES IT VAGUE AS
TO WHICH COMPARTMENT HE "ENTERED" UPON HIS ENTRY INTO THE HEAVENLY
SANCTUARY....thus making the issue not as clear-cut as some think!! But by now it should be
plain that hagia hagia or hagia hagion is used by the writer of Hebrews to specifically
mean the inner apartment, and he used it only when he wanted to clinch that specific
meaning, and so we cannot impose on the holy writ what the writer himself never chose to
write. Thus SDAs are correct when we say Jesus started to serve in the sanctuary (ta hagia) as
a whole at first, but the inner apartment phase of his ministry came only later (i.e. in 1844). We
are also on sound footing when we insist that Heb. 9:12 should be translated as he entering the
holies or the holy places, or the sanctuary on a whole; not specifically the Most Holy
Place/apartment phase of ministry.

[ii] Also, since the much debated expression, "the [temple] veil", needed a qualifying term by
the very writer of Hebrews i.e. "*after [or within] the *SECOND veil" (Hebrews 9:3), so as to
clinch a more specific meaning with reference to the hagia hagion (the most holy place),
and since there were two veils to the temple, it is therefore not conclusive that Heb. 6:19 was
referring specifically to behind the "veil" of the Most Holy Place when it was written. Even the
writer of Hebrews SYMBOLICALLY uses the term "the veil" to mean Jesus' flesh (Heb. 10:20). It
is obvious that to be in the Temple demanded that one pass through, and is behind or within
the first "veil" to the door of the Temple. Thus the expression in Heb. 6:19 could be referring to
being "within" or behind any of the two "veils", since Jesus was not a High Priest BEFORE his
incarnation, as He must have been made human to even minister in the Heavenly sanctuary in
the first place (Heb. 5). So his incarnation, obedience, and crucifixion opened the way, or gave
Him the right to His ministry in the Heavenly sanctuary, that is, He earned the right to be
minister "within the veil" or just simply the sanctuary itself. There is no evidence in the
expression itself, i.e. "within the veil" in Heb. 6:19 that this meant SPECIFICALLY The most Holy
Place", and not just within the sanctuary itself!! In fact as we consider the earthly sanctuary we
realize that the common people could only see the courtyard. They could not enter or see
into the sanctuary itself; only the priests (i.e. the daily as well as the high priest). Thus when
either the priest or high priest disappeared from their view he was entering through the first
veil into the sanctuary as a whole, and only by faith they accepted what took place inside.
Thus the expression within the veil can legitimately mean BOTH being in the temple as a
whole, as well as being in the most holy place behind the second veil (Hebrews 9:3). The
verses of the entire chapter of Hebrews 9, discuss all the services of the priests and high priests
21

in their daily rounds, as well as that once a year event involving the High Priest going into the
second apartment. The people could not see the priests in ANY of the work done in the holy
places behind the veils of the sanctuary itself, whether it was in the holy place OR the most
holy. In the same way, when Christ ascended to heaven we could no longer physically see
Him. We must follow Him in faith as He ministers for us in the Holy Places with all its
original patterns (plural) in the true sanctuary of heaven; not just in the Most Holy
Place/apartment.
[iii] Finally, while it is true Hebrews 9 makes reference to purification, bulls, goats, calves,
heifer, sprinkling of ashes and blood, and refers to the high priest entering the most holy place
once yearly, etc., and while it is true its mainly an imagery of the specific Day of Atonement
(Yom Kippur) and references the work in the most holy place, yet these descriptions are NOT
ONLY about that. Bulls, calves and goats were used other days of the year, for instance (with
blood entering the first apartment by way of the high priest on other crucial occasions like in
Lev. 4:7, 17, 18), and the sprinkling of ashes of the heifer, and dedication or symbolic
purification of all the vessels and furnishings of temple with blood relate to other days in the
yearly round of activities as well. This again debunks the claim of Dr. Desmond Ford that it was
only the inner apartment work Jesus entered upon. And so the SDA position in its Sanctuary
Message remains sound, despite the attempts of dissidents like Dr. Ford to use ambiguous
biblical references to try and overturn it.
c] Critics cannot prove that a pre-Advent Judgment by Christ (2 Cor. 5:9, 10; John 5:22) is not
needed, and they also cannot that prove that it is not prophetically timetabled, neither can
they prove that its not possible to know when it will start. Heres why they cannot!! When
Jesus ascended he ascended as a person invested with very many overlapping roles that either
were already fulfilled in Him or will be fulfilled in Him (e.g. He is Priest, High Priest, Sacrificial
Lamb, Final Judge, Rewarder, King of kings, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Elder brother,
Second Adam, et al) and it was and is proper to identify him by every role/title, even if he has
not fully officiated in that role at the time of he being referred to in writing or speech as such.
It is also quite logical that the unfolding of the salvation plan in Jesus, serving in his various
capacities, this does have a certain time table, and will unfold in its proper sequence
according to Gods plan. That is why, despite Jesus was expected to return immediately after
his ascension by New Testament Bible writers and apostolic Christians alike, yet almost two
thousand years of waiting has demonstrated quite convincingly that the redemption time
table is spread out over more time than had been previously thought. No doubt this is what
Jesus alluded to just before he ascended. Note carefully!
Acts 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at
this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? Acts 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to
know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. - KJV
Times or seasons [plural] naturally unfold in sequence and naturally have a timetable! No
doubt that is why it was further recorded about Jesus work above:
Acts 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men
everywhere to repent: Acts 17:31 Because he [God] hath appointed a day, in the which he will
22

judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained [i.e. Jesus]; whereof he
hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead. - KJV
Ecclesiastes 3:17 God shall judge [*BOTH] the righteous and the wicked: for there is a time for
every purpose and for every work. KJV
The Biblical expressions indicating that [1] God has appointed a day in which he will judge the
world and [2] there is a time for every purpose and for every work as it concerns judging
both the wicked and the righteous, these present irrefutable proofs that a divine timetable is
being followed for Jesus to judge the world (see John 5:23); whether in terms of what 2
Corinthians 5:9,10 and Ecclesiastes 12:13,14 bring to view as an INESCAPABLE investigation of
ones life record, or whether in terms of the later executing of justice and giving rewards at
Jesus appearing. BOTH are timetabled by God! And for those who think that believers saved
by grace through faith are exempt from an examination of their life record thereafter by Jesus
(see 2 Cor. 5:10), and who think that their assurance of salvation is so-called made uncertain
by the notions of a required standard of obedience and an investigative judgment on their lives,
they are easily refuted by the following Scriptures (its crucial that they be all read before
moving on):
THE INESCAPABLE INVESTIGATIVE JUDGMENT ALL OVER THE BIBLE
- See Philippians 2:12 with 1 Corinthians 9:25-27 and with John 15:1-8
-see Ecclesiastes 3:17 with Matthew 22:1-14 and with 1 Peter 4:17-19
-see James 2:10-12 with Revelation 11:1, 18, 19 and with Malachi 3:16-18
-see Ecclesiastes 12:13, 14 with Matthew 12: 36, 37 and with Revelation 20:11-15
Notice especially in Mal. 3:16-18 (just like in the parables of the talents and of the sheep and
the goats; Matthew 25) God carefully examining the book of record of those who fear him, and
in an event involving him making up his jewels he is seen actively examining his saints. Notice
too in James 2:12 how (in accordance with Ecclesiastes 12:13,14) it makes the point that saints
too should be mindful of being judged by the law that was referenced in verses 10 and 11
of James 2 (obviously the Ten Commandments). And notice how Rev. 11:1, 18, 19 brings to
view the Ark of the Covenant (see why in 1 Kings 8:9 and Malachi 4:1, 4) just when the saints
are also being examined or measured against a standard while rewards are determined. And
there are certainly other Scriptures like the ones above showing clearly that both the saints and
the lost will be examined/investigated, and rewards and punishments determined, and
obviously before Jesus returns with rewards for all (Rev.22:12). Saints are certainly saved by
grace (Eph. 2:8, 9), but will be judged by works of willing obedience (see Rev. 22:12-14); the
very good works that grace teaches us to do THROUGH GODS INDWELLING (see Titus
2:11-14 and James 2:20-24). God assesses the lives of the saints for the required fruit of
obedience to be shown, even as we remain or abide in Jesus in order to willingly show fruit
23

of obedience or good works (Eph. 2:10 and Titus 2:11). Failure to show fruit of obedience
will stand in judgment against the Christian (John 15:2), and hence why he can lose his initial
standing with God, as John 15:1-8 and 1 Cor. 9:25-27 clearly shows!! This is what the
examination of lives by God in the pre-advent judgment, even of the saint is all about (2 Cor.
5:9, 10; Eccl. 12: 13, 14; Mal. 3:16-18), and many want to sidestep or belittle this crucial
aspect of the Bible!!
Now, as it concerns judgment on all in Acts 17:31 (written by A.D. 63) notice carefully the
future tense of the words he will judge the world as it relates to the already appointed
day for this event. Thus when Acts was written by Luke by 63 A.D. (decades after Jesus had
already ascended) that event of judgment (whatever it would be like) had not yet occurred,
nor was it already going on since Jesus ascension!! I am convinced that there is nothing
unbiblical about SDAs teaching that while the timing of the second coming may have been
withheld (not just from the disciples at the time Jesus spoke, but now we know it is still being
withheld until he comes), but that does not necessarily mean that we cannot know about the
timing of the investigative aspect of God judging or examining BOTH the righteous and the
wicked (see again 2 Cor. 5:9,10; Eccl. 3:17; Mal. 3:16-18), i.e. as done through Jesus in the
Sanctuary above before he comes with rewards for all (see Rev. 22:12). SDAs believe that
certain Bible prophecies (as recorded in Daniel) would have been unsealed late in the very
time of the end, and in those very prophecies is revealed the appointed time for the
investigative judgment phase of Jesus work. This we believe has to be so in order that a special
Judgment hour message can be given when the appropriate time required it (symbolized as
being preached by three angels, as recorded in Revelation 14:6-12). This is what SDAs are
distinctively known for as it concerns proclaiming its unique Sanctuary Message and or
Judgment Hour Message, and hence fulfilling a unique prophetic role in Christendom,
despite all the opposition!! We believe that this Sanctuary Message MUST be preached, that
it will be fiercely opposed by Satan more than any other message of the end times (because
of its serious import), and we believe it can be biblically defended, and this is what this
presentation by me is all about.
Final Questions Regarding the Investigative Judgment of 1844
Now that I have demonstrated BIBLICALLY that the SDAs doctrines on prophetic matters and its
Sanctuary and Investigative Message can be defended with reasonable appeal, its time to close
by tying up the loose ends, and answering the remaining few question brother Lauriston
agonized over on Hardtalk. Here goes
Brother Thunder asked, indirectly:
If the dead are first being judged before the living since 1844, yet people die daily, then how
will God ever reach the living and then close the Investigative Judgment and Jesus returns the
24

second time?
ANSWER:

I am of the view that with God all things are possible, and just as the program host of
Hardtalk (Ian Boyne) remarked when brother Thunder expressed this concern about this, I
say, remember it is God we are dealing with, and what may baffle us in terms of a solution is
nothing to him. Keep in mind that God also has another seeming conundrum on his hands, in
that it is his will for every man to come to a saving knowledge of him and be saved, and yet
every day new babies are born. Should we deem it a problem for God (who doesnt expect
babies to hear sermons, believe on the Jesus and accept the gospel), that he will always be
waiting infinitum until all babies grow up to consciously accept the gospel and be saved, even
while others are being born (in an ongoing cycle)? Hmmm. I leave that one to God, and simply
believe that the intricacies of how the Investigative Judgment issues will all be resolved, that is
not my prerogative, but Gods own. Now, both Ian Boyne (the program host of Hardtalk) and
brother Lauriston seem to have this concern as described below:
Isnt the notion of God scrutinizing every minutiae (small detail) of the lives of Christians
seriously antithetical to the gospel which teaches that all sins have already been paid for by
Jesus when he died on the Cross?

ANSWER:
The above only becomes an issue if:
a] one either rejects portions of Scripture which teaches that both the wicked and the righteous
must ALL appear before the Judgment seat of Christ (clearly indicating a situation involving
the assessment of lives and passing of verdicts; 2 Cor. 5:9, 10), or if
b] one lives in fear of its results, when a full relationship of love with our Advocate above
should cast out all fear.
For emphasis, let me repeat what I wrote earlier about the inescapable nature of the PREADVENT Investigative Judgment for all (read again all the Scriptures listed):
THE INESCAPABLE INVESTIGATIVE JUDGMENT ALL OVER THE BIBLE
- See Philippians 2:12 with 1 Corinthians 9:25-27 and with John 15:1-8
-see Ecclesiastes 3:17 with Matthew 22:1-14 and with 1 Peter 4:17-19
-see James 2:10-12 with Revelation 11:1, 18, 19 and with Malachi 3:16-18
-see Ecclesiastes 12:13, 14 with Matthew 12: 36, 37 and with Revelation 20:11-15

25

Notice especially in Mal. 3:16-18 (just like in the parables of the talents and of the sheep and the
goats; Matthew 25) God carefully examining the book of record of those who fear him, i.e. the
righteous), and in an event involving him making up his jewels he is seen actively examining
his saints. Notice too in James 2:12 how (in accordance with Ecclesiastes 12:13,14) it makes the
point that saints too should be mindful of being judged by the law that was referenced in
verses 10 and 11 of James 2 (obviously the Ten Commandments). And notice how Rev. 11:1, 18,
19 brings to view the Ark of the Covenant (see why in 1 Kings 8:9 and Malachi 4:1, 4) just when
the saints are also being examined or measured against a standard while rewards are
determined. And there are certainly other Scriptures like the ones above showing clearly that
both the saints and the lost will be examined/investigated, and rewards and punishments
determined, and obviously before Jesus returns with rewards for all (Rev.22:12). Saints are
certainly saved by grace (Eph. 2:8, 9), but will be judged by works of willing obedience (see
Rev. 22:12-14); the very good works that grace teaches us to do THROUGH GODS
INDWELLING (see Titus 2:11-14 and James 2:20-24). God assesses the lives of the saints for the
required fruit of obedience to be shown, even as we remain or abide in Jesus in order to
willingly show fruit of obedience or good works (Eph. 2:10 and Titus 2:11). Failure to show
fruit of obedience will stand in judgment against the Christian (John 15:2), and hence why
he can lose his initial standing with God, as John 15:1-8 and 1 Cor. 9:25-27 clearly shows!! This
is what the examination of lives by God in the pre-advent judgment, even of the saint is all
about (2 Cor. 5:9, 10; Eccl. 12: 13, 14; Mal. 3:16-18), and many want to sidestep or belittle this
crucial aspect of the Bible!! ---end of quote
Now for those who think that for God to examine every minutiae of the lives of all (including
already saved Christians), that this is an invented cultic idea by SDAs, they need to
PRAYERFULLY read the following and meditate seriously on every word used:
Ecclesiates 12:13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and
keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.

Now notice VEEERY carefully the next verse (Eccl. 12:14)

(ASV) For God will bring every work into judgment, with every hidden thing, whether it be
good, or whether it be evil.
(BBE) God will be judge of every work, with every secret thing, good or evil.
(CEV) God will judge everything we do, even what is done in secret, whether good or bad.
(DRB) And all things that are done, God will bring into judgment for every error, whether it be
good or evil.
(ESV) For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or
evil.
(GNB) God is going to judge everything we do, whether good or bad, even things done in secret.
(GW) God will certainly judge everything that is done. This includes every secret thing, whether
it is good or bad.
26

(ISV) For God will judge every deed, along with every secret, whether good or evil.
(JPS) For God shall bring every work into the judgment concerning every hidden thing, whether
it be good or whether it be evil.
(KJV) For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be
good, or whether it be evil.
(LITV) For God shall bring every work into judgment, with all that is hidden, whether it is good,
or whether it is evil.
(MKJV) For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it is
good, or whether evil.
(RV) For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every hidden thing, whether it be good
or whether it be evil.
(WEB) For God will bring every work into judgment, with every hidden thing, whether it is
good, or whether it is evil.
(WEBA) For God will bring every work into judgment, with every hidden thing, whether it is
good, or whether it is evil.
(YLT) For every work doth God bring into judgment, with every hidden thing, whether good or
bad.'

The forgoing repetition is a little much, I know, but how else can I underscore the point about
what was said earlier? The multitude of Bible translations underscores the point effectively.
And heres another minutiae-related Scripture for you, straight from Jesus own mouth:
Matthew 12:36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they
shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
If the Investigation of lives will be so piercing, no wonder the Bible further says:
1 Peter 4:17-18 Judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what
shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner
appear?

Thank God for Jesus who stands at that awesome Judgment bar as our Advocate, and while
every minutiae is examined from our records (because Gods standards are indeed that
high), he [Jesus] covers our perfect failings with his perfect atoning death and his perfect life
of righteousness. We and our records will indeed be both cleansed and vindicated by Him,
if only we entrust ourselves entirely to Him. Hallelujah to the Lamb!!
As I wrap up, there is just one major question left to address, and it is this:
Isnt it the case that the1844 Investigative Judgment Message of SDAs detract from the
27

ministry of Christ simply because his atonement for sinners was finished or completed on
the Cross, yet the SDA teachings say that the this atonement continue after the Cross. And
doesnt this heresy, more than any other, render Adventism an anti-Christian cult?
It is so easy to misrepresent something or someone when you do not understand. SDAs fully
accept the completed work of Christ on the Cross, in terms of him offering himself as the
perfect Sacrifice, and thus rendering himself worthy to minister for us above in the Sanctuary.
Thus when he said it is finished, all he was saying was that what he came to earth to do was
finished, and thereafter he must return to Heaven to apply the benefits of what he
accomplished on earth. No wonder his ministry above has gone on for nearly 2000 years,
because it has to go through phases, and follow the unfolding plan of the times and seasons
he did not wish to burden his disciples with the details just before his ascension. What the
Message of SD Adventism does is, far from detracting from the ministry of Christ above,
Adventism reminds people of what they wish not to hear, and the truths in the Bible they fail to
comprehend. If Brother Lauriston had taken the time to see how SDA apologists and grounded
scholars explain how the completed atonement on the Cross is applied via a certain process in
heaven, and not that it is two separate atonements, then who knows (??), he would not now be
calling/cursing the Adventist Church an anti-Christian cult!! Why did the daily offering of the
atonement sacrifices in the earthly sanctuary still have a climaxing Day of Atonement inside
the sanctuary at the end of each ceremonial year; an Atonement activity that was separated
from the daily atonement activities outside the sanctuary? Why didnt the daily atonement
sacrifices accomplish the process of atonement once and for all daily? Because God was
teaching us a deeper truth in those symbols; i.e. that the work of salvation goes through
phases!! Plain and simple. If brother Lauriston had just taken the time to see how this matter is
reasonably explained in this linked book, for instance, things might have been different. I
encourage the reader to click the link above and read for yourself the explanation on the linked
page. Its important that you do.
In the end, I see clearly that Dr. Angel Manuel Rodriquez is still onboard with our Sanctuary
Message, when he made plain:
Without 1844 and the doctrine of the Sanctuarythis may sound strong to you but I have
already published itthere is no reason for us [SDAs] to exist. 1844 provided for us our
identity and our mission. ... In other words, I find it extremely difficult to deny this
fundamental doctrine clearly associated in Adventist thinking with 1844 and Daniel 8:14. I
find it very difficult to understand, how we could [ever] really be Adventists and yet deny the
very foundation of our existencedeny our birth.
I agree with him wholeheartedly. Adventism stands alone in teaching this Message, and
contending with/over this Message is part of the shaking experience many SDAs will go
through in these last days. The same way Christianitys central pillar is the doctrine of the
resurrection of Jesus, and if that is not true as a reality then Christians today are still in their
sins, and Christianity would have no reason to exist, so too is Adventism in its special end-time
role when it concerns the 1844 Message. My prayer and hope is that the SDA brethren will
realize that it is not a small matter, just like believing and teaching that Jesus actually rose from
28

the dead is central to the general Christian faith (no matter the ridicule coming from the
unbelieving world regarding that teaching). Its time to study to show ourselves approved unto
God; workmen who need not be ashamed but rightly dividing the Word of truth!! If teaching
these truths I have outlined for the benefit of readers to see the reason for the Adventist faith
means me being called a cultist then so be it. Jesus was called a demon (Beelzebub). So
whats really new? I am proud to suffer reproach for him, and to stand away from the crowd
since the crowd is not always right, or the best place to be found sheltered.
CLIMAX & CONCLUSION:
As I close this presentation, there are other matters brother Lauriston alluded to that I could
address, but I wont at this time, since the main issues have been addressed to establish
whether SDAs are generally misguided or not. Readers now have a basis on which to judge, and
I leave every man to be convinced in his own mind. All I wish to do at this time is to leave the
reader with what this much-maligned and much-misrepresented author said about whats
really important to prove what is truth:
"...multitudes do not want Bible truth, because it interferes with the desires of the sinful,
world-loving heart; and Satan supplies the deceptions which they love. But God will have a
people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all
doctrines and the basis of all reforms. The opinions of learned men, the deductions of science,
the creeds or decisions of ecclesiastical councils, as numerous and discordant as are the
churches which they represent, the voice of the majority--not one nor all of these should be
regarded as evidence for or against any point of religious faith. Before accepting any doctrine
or precept, we should demand a plain "Thus saith the Lord" in its support."
--- E.G. White, The Great Controversy (1911), pgs. 594- 595
Right throughout this two-part presentation I HAVE APPEALED ONLY TO THE BIBLE!! Now I
leave God to do his work of convicting hearts, as only he knows how to do.
Dear brother Elce Lauriston, and others who may share his views, I leave these firmly held
words again with you, that:

Gods Church Will Weather the Thunder, Wind and the Rain!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Derrick Gillespie is a trained teacher in the Social Sciences, History, and Geography, and remains a
member of the SDA Church in Jamaica and a lay evangelist for SDAs.
(Email: ddgillespie@live.com; Webpage: https://www.facebook.com/derrick.gillespie)
29