Ángel Manuel Rodríguez
Supplement
to the Adventist Review
By
Angel Manuel Rodríguez
Introduction
Of
all the prophecies of the Bible, those centering on Daniel 8 and 9 are
the most critical for Seventh-day Adventists. Here we find the 2300 days,
the sanctuary, and its cleansing. These prophecies focused the message
of William Miller and the pioneers of our movement, and they are still
vital for understanding our times. In this special supplement to the Adventist
Review, Dr.
Angel Rodriguez, an associate director of the Biblical Research Institute
of the General Conference, examines these chapters in light of intensive
Adventist study during the past 15 years.
A second supplement, authored by Review
editor William G. Johnsson, will expound Revelation 12-14, and will
be included in our November 1994 North American Division issue.
The
political map of the ancient Near East was about to enter a process of
significant change. The year was 550
B.C., and Astyages, king of Media, and Cyrus, from Persia, were involved
in a war of survival. Sadly for Astyages, his army was defeated, and Cyrus
assumed control over the Media kingdom. A new empire was being born. Cyrus
spent three years establishing control over the lands he took from the
Medes. Then, in 547 B.C., he pushed west to conquer Lydia.[1]
The future empire was growing, extending its tentacles of power, engulfing
other nations in its expansionistic wars.
In 547 B.C. Daniel had the vision
recorded in chapter 8 of his book.[2] In the vision he was transported
from Babylon to the Persian city of Susa. This visionary experience was
already a sign of the radical change the land would experience through
the collapse of the Babylonian Empire and the rise of the Medo-Persian
one. The information recorded in the rest of the chapter was not the result
of Daniel's creativity. The vision, he says, was shown to him
(see verse 1). He was simply the receptor of a divine revelation that
would cover a large span of time from the time of the prophet to "the
distant future" (verse 26).
I.
The Vision of Daniel 8
A. The Ram and the Goat
In
the vision Daniel found himself by a waterway near Susa, where he saw
a ram with two long horns, one
higher than the other. The ram charged to the west, the north, and the
south, and no one was able to stand before it. It did as it pleased and
became great. The angel informed Daniel that the ram represented the Medo-Persian
Empire (verse 20). When Daniel had the vision, the ram was already charging
against Lydia in the west.
Next,
the prophet saw a he-goat coming from the west at such speed that it gave
the impression of flying (verse 5). It had a large horn between
its eyes. This animal represented the kingdom of Greece; the horn was
Alexander the Great (see verse 21). It took Alexander about four years
(334-331 B.C.) to destroy the Medo-Persian empire. But Alexander died
young, "at the height of his power" (verse 8, NIV), leaving the empire
without a capable successor. As a result, the empire was weakened from
within and finally divided itself into four sections—Macedonia, Asia
Minor, Syria, and Egypt.
If
we compare this section of the vision with Daniel 7, we notice that Daniel
8 has no symbol for Babylon. Why? Possibly because from God's perspective
Babylon was already passing away and a new world empire was taking its
place. A historian has stated that "strategically Cyrus' conquest of Babylon
began with the campaign against Lydia [547 B.C.]."[3] Another reason,
perhaps more important, concerns the prophetic time element mentioned
in Daniel 8:14. We will address this later.
Apart from the absence of Babylon,
the parallelism between Daniel 7 and 8 is clear. The bear/ram represents
Medo-Persia; the leopard/he-goat, Greece; the four heads on the leopard/four
horns of the he-goat, the divisions of the Greek Empire.
B. The
Little Horn
1. Origin
of the Little Horn
Bible
students have found it difficult to establish the origin of the little
horn introduced in Daniel 8:9. The main problem has to do with the connection
between the last part of verse 8 and the first part of verse 9. Describing
the division of the Greek Empire, Daniel says, "And in its place four
prominent horns grew up toward the four winds of heaven" (NIV). Then the
little horn is introduced: "Out of one of them came another horn" (NIV).
The question is To what is the phrase "out of one of them" referring?
Is the antecedent the horns or the winds of heaven?
The
Hebrew text itself provides the answer. In Hebrew, nouns and pronouns
have gender; they are either masculine or feminine. If the gender of a
noun is feminine, a pronoun referring to it must be feminine. This simple
rule helps us to identify the place of origin of the little horn. The
genders of nouns and pronouns in Daniel 8:8 and 9 are as follows: ". .
. four [horns] [feminine]. . . four winds [feminine] of heaven [plural,
masculine]." "Out of one [feminine] of them [masculine] . . ." "As we
look carefully for gender agreement, we find only one option. The pronoun
"them" cannot refer back to "horns," because "horns" is feminine and "them"
is masculine. "Them" can refer only to "heaven," which is plural in Hebrew
and masculine in gender. The numeral "one" must refer to "winds" because
both are feminine. We can, then, paraphrase verse 9 as follows: Out of
one [of the winds] of them [the heavens] came a horn.[4]
The
little horn did not come out of any of the Greek horns, but from one of
the cardinal points. Thus was indicated that the horn was a new power,
not an outgrowth of one of the four horns previously mentioned.
2. Work
of the Little Horn
The
description of the work and activities of the little horn provided by
Daniel help us define its nature. The Hebrew text calls this horn "a horn
from smallness/littleness," suggesting that it "came forth from a small
beginning and developed in various directions, gaining immense strength."[5]
a. Horizontal
Expansion
Daniel
uses several verbs to describe the activities of the little horn. Possibly
the most important one is "to become great" (Hebrew gadal,
"to grow up, be great"), and in verse 9 it describes the military
and political conquests of the little horn. The horn grew through military
expansion. The same verb is used to describe the military expansion of
the ram (verse 4) and the he-goat (verse 8). This verb used by Daniel
to describe the military power of world empires suggests that the little
horn is another empire.
Like
Medo-Persia and Greece the little horn grew or became great by conquering
other nations. It extended itself to the south, the east, and the land
of Israel, called by Daniel "the Beautiful Land" (NIV) or "the ornament"
(cf. Dan. 11:16). This horizontal expansion marked the first
stage of growth of the little horn and was fundamentally military
and political in nature.[6]
b. Vertical
Expansion
Verse
10 introduces the second stage of growth of the little horn and again
we find the verb "to grow/become great." Now the horn extends itself upward,
toward the heavenly host. A new development is taking place here. The
little horn is doing something that none of the other empires mentioned
in Daniel 8 had done. The military expansion of those other powers was
limited exclusively to the horizontal plane.
The
little horn has gone through a radical change in its search for power.
Its nature has been transmuted from a military and political power to
a religious one. It takes its struggle for power to a new level, namely,
the heavenly. This power attempts to achieve what Lucifer had aspired
to (Isa. 14:12-14). Like Lucifer, and in contrast to the two previous
kingdoms, the little horn seems to feel that it has the right and freedom
to extend its political and religious control to the very heavens, to
the dwelling of God.
We
should note that because of the dual expansion of the little horn, Daniel
8:9-14 blends two different types of images and language. We find military
language and images combined with language and concepts used in the sanctuary
services as the prophet tries to describe for us the work and true nature
of this power. The little horn has become a political and religious power
launching a military attack against the very center of the universe, the
heavenly sanctuary.
We
see the vertical expansion of the little horn in the following details:
(1)
The
Little Horn and the Heavenly Host.
As soon as the little horn turned upward it had to confront the armies
of the Lord, called by Daniel the heavenly host (verse 10). This phrase
is used in the Old Testament in different ways. The
noun "host" designates "troops, an army" (see Deut. 20:9; 1 Kings 2:5;
Ps. 44:9; 60:10). In some cases it is employed in connection with the
sanctuary and the work of the Levitical guard (Num. 4:3, 23, 30). When
used in conjunction with God (armies of the Lord), it can designate
the people of Israel as an army (Ex. 6:26; 7:4). In other passages "the
host of heaven" are the angels of God (1 Kings 22:19, NIV; Ps.103:19-21).
The Leader of the host is the Prince of the heavenly hosts (Joshua 5:14),
who are servants of the Lord (Ps. 103:21).
In Daniel the host and stars of heaven
(Dan. 8:10) refer particularly to the holy ones as the object of attack
of the little horn (verse 24). They are part of God's army. The little
horn is able to throw down some of the host and stars, which
suggests that its victory is not absolute. The verb "to throw/cast down"
has here the connotation of military defeat of someone. The little horn
even trampled on the host. The verb "to trample" emphasizes even more
the ideas of defeat (cf. Isa. 41:25), humiliation, and powerlessness
(cf. Isa. 28:3; 26:5, 6). The host is unable to overcome the
little horn (cf. Dan. 8:7).
"Host"
combines military and religious concepts because it designates the army
of the
Lord. The little horn is in war against God Himself, but its victory
is a partial one.
(2) The Little Horn and the
Prince. The little horn moves upward in two stages.
In the first one it attacks the heavenly host, but in the second movement
it becomes great against the Prince of the host (verse 11). This Prince
is mentioned in Joshua 5:14. He is a heavenly being in charge
of the heavenly armies. Joshua was also a commander in charge of God's
heavenly army on earth. Both armies worked together to defeat Jericho.
In Daniel the term Prince is used to refer to the Messiah, called
Michael the prince in Dan. 10:13, 21; 12:1 (cf. 9:25). This Person has
kingly and priestly functions.
(a)
Work of
the Prince: Daniel
8:11 shows that the Prince is in charge of "the continual," called in
Hebrew the tamid. This term is used quite often in the sanctuary
services of the Old Testament. The priests were commanded by the Lord
to perform certain activities in the sanctuary continually. For instance,
they were to keep the lamps burning continually (Ex. 27:20), incense was
to be burned continually (Ex. 30:8), the fire on the altar was to burn
continually (Lev. 6:13), and a burnt offering was to be on the
altar continually (Ex. 29:42). The term tamid, or "continual,"
summarizes in a precise way the daily work of the priests in the holy
place throughout the year. This word is never associated with the work
of the high priest in the Most Holy Place during the Day of Atonement.
In the vision Daniel saw the heavenly
Prince in the heavenly sanctuary performing the daily services. It was
a ministry of mediation and intercession on behalf of His people, typified
by the work of the Levitical priests in the holy place of the earthly
sanctuary. This Prince is, therefore, the high priest mentioned in Hebrews
8:1, 2 who is officiating "in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up
by the Lord, not by man" (verse 2, NIV); and who "always lives to intercede"
for us (Heb. 7:25, NIV; cf. Rom. 8:34; 1 Tim. 2:5). Through His
incarnation, sacrificial death, resurrection, and ascension He was qualified
to function as high priest in the heavenly temple (Heb. 4:14-5:10; 9:11,
12).
(b)
Taking
Away the Daily:
We notice that the little horn is not able to defeat or kill the
Prince. It only removed the continual/tamid from Him. It
ascribed to itself that which was the exclusive work of the Prince in
the heavenly sanctuary. This is the meaning of the phrase "and from him
[the Prince] was taken the continual."
The
Hebrew verb translated "to take" (rûm)
has a variety of meanings ("be high, arise, exalt, be removed, lift
up"). The verbal form used in Daniel 8:11 means "be removed, be exalted,"
and is used in the sanctuary services to designate the action of removing
from the sacrificial victims the portion that went to the altar (for example,
see Lev. 4:8, 10).
The
meaning of the verb in Daniel can be further defined by the preposition
used with it. The continual is removed "from." Whenever the verb rûm
is accompanied by that preposition, it always expresses the idea
of separation. Something is removed from someone or something
(for example, see Ex. 29:27; Lev. 4:10; 1 Sam. 2:8; Ps. 113:7; Isa. 57:14).
At times removing, or separating, someone from others results in
exaltation (for example, see 1 Kings 14:7; Ps. 113:7, 8), but the fundamental
idea of the verb continues to be that of "removing from." Only the context
will indicate whether the idea of exaltation is also present.
The
little horn removed the continual from the Prince by usurping His priestly
work. By ascribing to itself the work of the Prince, the little horn makes
the mediation of the Prince ineffective for those who support its political
and religious aspirations.
(c) Casting
Down the Place of the Sanctuary:
Next, the little horn "casts down the place of his [the Prince's]
sanctuary" (Dan. 8:11). The verb "cast down/throw down" (shalak) was
used in verse 7 to describe the victory of the he-goat over the ram. A
synonym was employed in verse 10 to indicate the defeat of the host
by the little horn. When an enemy or an army is thrown down, it clearly
means defeat. But here in Daniel 8:11, what is cast down is not a person
but the place of the sanctuary. One could argue that in this case the
verb means something like "to destroy, to ruin" (cf. 2 Kings 23:12; Eze.
5:4; Amos 8:3; Ex. 32:19). It would then mean that the little horn ruined
the place of the sanctuary where the Prince was officiating. This may
be the interpretation, but there seems to be a better one.
The
Hebrew verb shalak,
"to throw, to cast" is used in Hebrew in a similar manner to the
English equivalent. In both languages the verb "to throw/cast" very often
takes a preposition. Something is cast "to the ground" (Dan. 8:7, RSV),
"behind your back" (1 Kings 14:9, RSV), from somewhere (2 Kings 14:20),
in some place (Amos 8:3), "on" someone (2 Sam. 11:21, NIV), "outside the
gates" (Jer. 22:19, NIV), etc. The meaning of the verb is somewhat affected
by the preposition it takes.
In
Daniel 8:11 the verb shalak, "to throw, to cast," is not accompanied
by a preposition or an adverb—it stands all by itself. The text simply
reads: "the place of the sanctuary was cast/thrown." The English translation
does not make sense unless an adverb is added to it. Various
translations read "cast/thrown down." The adverb "down" is not
in the original. Daniel 8:11 is not the only passage in the Old Testament
where this verb stands by itself without a preposition or an adverb. In
those other passages the verb "to throw/cast" is used to express the idea
of rejection, abandonment. For instance, desperate soldiers trying to
escape the enemy had "thrown" (abandoned) their equipment (2 Kings 7:15,
RSV); an olive tree throws (discards, rejects) its blossoms (Job
15:33); the Israelites did not throw (forsake, reject) their
idols (Eze. 20:8; cf. Isa. 2:20); the slain of the nations will be thrown
(abandoned), that is, they will not be buried (Isa. 34:3; cf. Jer. 36:30);
the psalmist prays, Do not cast me [reject, forsake] me . . . when I am
old" (Ps. 71:9, NIV). These examples show that the verb "to cast" can
be a synonym of such verbs as "to reject, forsake, abandon."
In Daniel 8:11, the little horn was
to cast, or throw, in the sense of reject, abandon, or forsake, "the place"
of the sanctuary (NIV). The Hebrew word translated "place" is used in
the Old Testament to designate God's dwelling, that is to say, the heavenly
sanctuary (1 Kings 8:39, 43) as well as the earthly sanctuary (verse 13).
It can also refer to a literal (Ezra 2:68; 3:3) or metaphorical foundation
(Ps. 89:14; 97:2). Daniel 8:11 is the only passage in the Old Testament
where we find the phrase "place of his sanctuary" (NIV). "Place"
may well mean here "foundation" in a metaphorical sense; that is to say,
it could be referring to the very essence and purpose of the sanctuary.
This usage would be similar to what we find in Psalm 89:14, where the
"foundation of your [God's] throne" (NIV) is not literal but metaphorical,
that is, "righteousness and justice" (NIV), designating the fundamental
principles upon which God's throne is established.
A
careful reading of Daniel 8:11 suggests that there is a close connection
between the taking away of the continual and the act of throwing (away)
the place of the sanctuary. The very purpose of the sanctuary is directly
related to the work of the messianic Prince, that is to say, His work
of mediation, intercession, and forgiveness of sins. By misappropriating
the continual ministry of the Prince, the little horn in fact rejects
the very foundation of the heavenly sanctuary as a center of mediation
and forgiveness.
(d)
A Host Over the Daily: Another activity of the little horn
is described in verse 12: "And a host was given over the continual in
transgression/rebellion." The Hebrew is somewhat difficult, but "the most
plausible translation . . . is 'thus an army will be set over the daily
. . . in an act of rebellion.'"[7] he
verb "to give" (nathan)
when used with the preposition "over" (cal) means very often
"to appoint someone over, to set over" (cf. Dan. 11:21).[8] What
the text seems to be saying is that once the little horn misappropriated
the continual, it immediately appointed a host or army over it to control
or to minister it.
The Hebrew phrase "in transgression/rebellion"
is difficult to translate. The NIV renders it "because of rebellion,"
suggesting that what happened to the continual and to the sanctuary was
the result of the rebellion of God's people—that God was punishing
them. But this view does not seem to be right because the book of Daniel
never considers the persecution and suffering of the holy ones to be a
punishment for their own sins.[9] They, like Daniel and his companions,
are persecuted because of their unwavering loyalty to God. This transgression
or rebellion "is certainly the offense of the little horn."[10]
We can, then, translate the Hebrew phrase as "in the course of
transgression" or "in an act of rebellion."
Daniel
is informing us that the activity of the little horn against the continual
and the heavenly sanctuary is in essence a manifestation of a spirit of
rebellion against God. Its work can be defined through a single word—"rebellion"
(Hebrew, peshac).
Peshac is one of the strongest terms for sin in the Old Testament
because it designates sin as an attack against God's sovereignty. The
person "who commits a peshac does not simply rebel against Yahweh
or raise himself up against Him, but he breaks with Him, takes that which
is His away, robs, defrauds Him, lays his hands on that which belongs
to Him."[11] This understanding of the term peshac describes
in a precise way the activity of the little horn.
(e)
Cast
the Truth to the Ground:
Finally, the little horn cast truth to the ground. The verb "to cast/throw"
is used once more by the prophet, but this time it is followed by a phrase
indicating the direction of the action ("thrown to the ground" [NIV]).
"Truth" in this context seems to refer to the truth about the daily and
the sanctuary. Hence, the statement "to cast the truth to the ground"
is a summary of the work of the little horn. This truth is comprehensive
enough to encompass the revelation of God's redemptive plan as well as
the revelation of His will for our lives (cf. Mal. 2:5-8). Casting
truth to the ground is to be understood metaphorically. It means despising,
disregarding, rejecting truth. These ideas are already present in the
context.
The
description of the work of the little horn ends with the statement "and
it acted and prospered" (Dan. 8:12). The little horn grew in power without
any significant opposition, reaching even to the heavens. But this state
of affairs was not going to be a permanent one.
C. The
Question: "Until When. . . ?"
Toward
the end of the vision Daniel heard a conversation between two celestial
beings called holy ones. The phrase "holy ones" is a peculiar way of referring
to angels. But in a passage like the one here, which is interested in
the sanctuary services, such a usage would be appropriate. Those who officiate
with the Prince in the heavenly qodesh,
"sanctuary," are qedoshim, "holy ones."
1. Structure
of the Question
One
of the angels asked the other angel an important question: "For how long
is the vision concerning the continual burnt offering, the transgression
that makes desolate, and the giving over of the sanctuary and host to
be trampled under foot?" (verse 13, RSV). The interrogative particle "how
long?" places the main emphasis of the question on the end of the time
period and could be rendered in English "Until when?"[12]
That such is the case is also indicated by the way the answer is
phrased: "Until . . . ; then . . ." (verse 14). Until (cad) is
used in a temporal sense to refer to "the time before an event
takes place."[13] The event that
puts an end to the time period is introduced by the particle "then."
In
order to understand the answer given to the question, we should first
understand the question itself. A literal translation is "Until when the
vision [chazon],
the daily [tamid], and the rebellion [peshac] that
causes desolation to give both the sanctuary and the host a trampling?"
The Hebrew text does not read "the vision of/concerning the continual
burnt offering." Rather, what we find is an interrogative particle
followed by several nouns referring back to what Daniel saw before:
Until
when
| |
the
vision (chazon) |
This
refers back to Daniel 8:1: A vision [chazon] was shown to
me." |
| |
the
continual (tamid) |
Refers
to the work of the Prince of hosts (verse 11). |
| |
the
rebellion (peshac) |
Designates
the attack of the little horn against the Prince and the sanctuary
(verses 10-12). |
2. The
Vision
In Daniel 8 the term chazon,
"vision," designates the totality of the vision recorded in the chapter,
with the exception of the prophetic time period mentioned by one of the
angels. For that last section of the vision the term mar,eh,
"appearance, vision," is used (verse 26).[14] Therefore, the question
is interested in the time when the vision, chazon, as a whole
would be fulfilled.
3. The
Daily
The
continual (tamid)
is used without any modifiers. The context indicates that it is something
good and positive because the Prince is in charge of it in the heavenly
sanctuary. In the question, "the continual" is referring to the
exclusive work of mediation and intercession of the Prince in the holy
place. Hence, the question is interested in revealing the time when the
work of the Prince in the holy place would conclude.
4. The
Rebellion
Finally,
"the rebellion" points back to verse 12 and is used to describe the work
of the little horn. This obviously means that the question is interested
in knowing when the attack of the little horn against the sanctuary will
come to an end. The answer to this question must address that concern.
The last part of Daniel 8:13 provides
a summary of the activity of the little horn. We should examine it. The
"rebellion that causes desolation" is followed by a verb that introduces
the results of the rebellious actions of the horn: it makes "both the
sanctuary and the host a trampling."
a.
Brings Desolation
The verb "to desolate" is
employed in the Old Testament in at least two different ways.[15] It describes
the condition of a place after attack by enemies (for example, see Lev.
26:31; Joel 1:17), and also the psychological impact produced by the desolation
on those who observed it (1 Kings 9:8; Ezra 9:3, 4). Both usages are found
in Daniel (Dan. 9:18; 8:27).
The
desolation mentioned in Daniel 8:13 is probably to be related to the little
horn's attack against the sanctuary. In the Old Testament a desolated
place is deserted, abandoned by those who used to live there or have access
to it (for example, see Lev. 26:22,
34; Isa. 33:8; Jer. 33:10; Zeph. 3:6; Zech. 7:14). The little horn desolated
the heavenly sanctuary by usurping the priestly work of the Prince, by
rejecting ("throwing [away]") the place of the sanctuary, and by establishing
its own priestly work. It made the true sanctuary inaccessible to those
who submitted to its power. This type of rebellion would also cause an
appalling horror in those who would observe it.
b. Trampling
the Host and the Sanctuary
The
spirit of rebellion that characterizes the little horn leads it to trample
the host and the sanctuary. We suggested already that the trampling of
the host indicates not only defeat but also humiliation and powerlessness.
That which is trampled on is considered to be ineffective and useless
(for example, see Eze. 34:18, 19; Isa. 5:5). This is exactly
how the little horn perceives the heavenly sanctuary.
A
close parallel to the trampling of the sanctuary is found in Isaiah 1:12,
where reference is made to the trampling of the courts of the Temple.
God described the worship of His people as a trampling because they had
separated ethics from worship by not following God's requirements (see
verse 10). They attempted to worship God without submitting themselves
to the covenant law that regulated the social and religious life of the
people.
The
description of the activity of the little horn recorded in Daniel 8:13
is a summary of what was stated before. The activity of this power is
essentially an act of open rebellion against God that brings spiritual
desolation and produces horror in those who see what is happening. The
rebellion consists in the usurpation of the mediatorial work of the Prince
and the trampling of the host and the sanctuary. The host is defeated
and humiliated, and the sanctuary is rejected. A new system is set up,
and consequently the heavenly sanctuary becomes desolate, rejected by
those who follow or are under the control of the little horn.
This
attack against the sanctuary is described by Daniel as a profanation (Dan.
11:31). The verb "to profane, to desecrate" (chalal) is used
in the context of the sanctuary services to designate the violation of
the sanctity of an object. It should not be confused with the verb "to
contaminate." The opposite of the pure is the impure, and the opposite
of the holy is the common (the profane). To profane the holy is to treat
it as something common, ignoring or rejecting its connection with the
Holy One. In the act of profanation, that which belonged exclusively to
God is treated disrespectfully and brought down to the sphere of the common.
D. The
Answer: "Until. . . ; then. . ."
1. Cleansing/Vindication
of the Sanctuary
The
final resolution of the conflict for power described in Daniel 8 is introduced
in verse 14 (as an answer to the question we have just discussed): "Until
2300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be restored to its rightful
state/cleansed." We will deal with the time period later; for now we will
examine the verb translated "to restore to its rightful state" (
nitsdaq).
There
are a couple of problems that make it difficult to understand the meaning
of the verb
nitsdaq. The verbal root is
tsadaq and usually
means "be in the right, be vindicated, be righteous." The verbal form used
by Daniel is not used anywhere else in the Old Testament. In other words,
we do not have comparative material to assist us in understanding the specific
meaning of the verb in this particular case. Second, the verb
tsadaq
never takes the sanctuary or any other building as its object. The
verb is not used to designate the rebuilding or restoration of a physical
structure. However, these problems are not insurmountable. A study of the
usage of the verbal root and its derivatives solves the difficulties we
are confronting.
a. The
Root Tsadaq in Legal Contexts
Several
studies have been made on the use of the verb
tsadaq,
the nouns
tsedeq/tsedaqah, "righteousness," and the adjective-noun
tsaddiq, "righteous."[16] Scholars generally accepted that those
terms are associated in the Old Testament with the law court, God's salvific
actions, and the sanctuary services. These words emphasize the idea of restoring
or preserving the order established by God.
The
primary use of the root
tsadaq is legal. It designates the restoration
of the legal rights of a person falsely accused of a crime. The legal context
presupposes a legal procedure. Thus, the psalmist prayed to God, "Judge
me, O Lord, according to my righteousness and according to the integrity
that is in me" (Ps. 7:8, RSV). This individual knows that he or she is innocent,
and goes to the sanctuary seeking vindication. There God will vindicate
the person, or declare him or her innocent (cf. Ps. 9:4; 1 Kings 8:31, 32;
Isa. 50:8,
9). (If the person is guilty, God will not acquit him
or her [Ex. 23:7; cf. Lev. 19:15;
Deut. 16:18].) In such contexts
the righteous are declared innocent and the accusers condemned (see 2 Chron.
6:23; Ps. 7:8, 9; Deut. 25:1).
Whenever
the root
tsadaq is used in its legal setting, it does not simply
designate "an impartial decision between two parties, based on a legal norm,
such as is known in Western law, but protecting, restoring, helping righteousness,
which helps those who have had their right taken from them in the communal
relationship to regain it."[17] Its restoration includes, at the same
time, punishment for the evildoer.[18] Therefore, the destruction of the
wicked always takes place as a manifestation of God's righteousness on behalf
of those whom He vindicates.[19]
b.
The Root Tsadaq
in Salvation Contexts
The legal use of the verbal
root under consideration extends itself to include the idea of salvation.
God's righteousness is His saving action on behalf of His people.[20] Those
who are vindicated by God are saved by Him from oppressive situations. This
explains why "salvation" and "righteousness" are used as synonyms (for example,
see Ps. 98:2-9; Isa. 1:27, 28; 46:13). Righteousness as salvation again
includes the destruction of the oppressor, which results in the restoration
of order and harmony in society and the world (cf. Ps. 143:11, 12; 71:2-4,
24; 33:5-11).
c. The Root Tsadaq
and the Sanctuary Services
Righteousness
was closely associated with the sanctuary services.[21]
In Leviticus what was required in order to have access to the sanctuary
was "purity," and it was obtained through atonement. In the book of Psalms
what was required was "righteousness," and it was granted as a gift in the
sanctuary (Ps. 24:3-5). The righteous were not only those who remained loyal
to the Lord (Ps. 15:2-4), but also those whose sins had been forgiven (Ps.
32:1, 2, 11). The term "righteousness" describes the gates of the Temple
(Ps. 1118:19), the priestly dress (Ps. 132:9), and the sacrifices offered
to the Lord (Ps. 4:5;
51:19; Deut. 33:19). Thus, the concept of
righteousness was embedded in the sanctuary services.
Therefore, it should not be a surprise
to find the root
tsadaq used as a synonym for purity (cf. Job 4:17;
17:9; Ps. 18:20; 51:4). The root includes within its different shades of
meanings the ideas of cleansing and purity. Isaiah 53:11 provides an illustration:
"By his knowledge my righteous servant [the Messiah] will justify [declare
righteous] many, and he will bear their iniquities" (NIV). Only the truly
Righteous One could declare the many righteous. This was possible, not because
they were righteous/clean, but because the Servant removed their sin, their
uncleanness, from them by bearing it Himself. Thus, the passage indicates
that to be declared righteous by God is also to be purified, cleansed from
sin.
This brief word study provides an indispensable
background for the proper understanding of Daniel 8:14. We notice that the
term
tsadaq is associated with such concepts as judgment, vindication,
cleansing, and salvation. The term conveys the idea of the restoration of
the order established by God through a work of cleansing and judgment. Daniel
8:14 refers to an event that will lead to the carrying out of all of these
concepts. More specifically, the context of Daniel makes clear that this
event will take place after the vision of the whole chapter is fulfilled--this
event follows the daily ministry (the
tamid) of the Prince, it
should vindicate the people of God who have been attacked and persecuted
by the little horn, and it will put an end to the rebellious and desecrating
work of the little horn. The basic question is To what specific event does
Daniel refer? Can we find a biblical parallel for it?
d. The Day of Atonement
and Daniel 8:14
Only
one event mentioned in the Bible could function as a type for the eschatological
event mentioned by Daniel, namely the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16). This event
was part of the sanctuary services, had an impact on the people of God and
the sanctuary, and addressed the problem of flagrant rebellion against God.
In addition, this event was not part of the daily ministry of the priest,
but took place at the beginning of the year. The Day of Atonement involved
a new aspect of the ministry of the high priest, one distinct from the daily
and performed in the Most Holy Place of the sanctuary. It closed, so to
speak, the religious services of the sanctuary for the past year and introduced
a new beginning.
One
of the main purposes of the daily services in the Israelite sanctuary was
to make divine forgiveness available to repentant sinners through sacrificial
atonement. By means of the sacrificial system, sin and impurity were transferred
to the sanctuary and the sinner was forgiven.[22] By the atonement God assumed
responsibility for the sins of His people. But during the Day of Atonement
God removed sin and impurity from the sanctuary, revealing Himself to be
totally and absolutely unrelated to sin. That day the true originator of
sin, Sat
an, was clearly identified
and made responsible for the problem of sin. God's holiness was thus vindicated,
and the cleansing of His people reached its consummation.
It is to this conglomerate of ideas
that Daniel is referring. He points to a time when the heavenly sanctuary,
the place where the Prince officiates on behalf of His people, will disassociate
itself from the sin problem, bringing the salvation of His holy ones to
its consummation. The author of Hebrews pointed also to that event, saying,
"It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified
with these [animal] sacrifices, but the
heavenly things themselves
with better sacrifices [Christ's] than these" (Heb. 9:23, NIV). Daniel's
apocalyptic vision gives to the Day of Atonement a cosmic dimension that
will result in the final resolution of the sin problem.
We
also should notice that during the Day of Atonement God's court was in session.
His people were evaluated, and those who had not remained in a faith relationship
with Him were "cut off" from among His people (see Lev. 23:27-31). While
the community of the righteous ones rested in the Lord during the Day of
Atonement, the impenitent, rebellious sinners were removed from the camp.
No sacrificial atonement was available to them. This is precisely what Daniel
says about the ultimate fate of the little horn: "He will be destroyed,
but not by human power" (Dan. 8:25, NW);
that is to say, not through human intervention. The day of atonement
is an event at the close of which God's people will experience final salvation
and the wicked will be destroyed. Then order and harmony will be restored
to the universe.
Thus, the desecration of the sanctuary
perpetrated by the little horn is redressed through the horn's destruction.
According to the Old Testament, the rebellious desecration of the sanctuary
was redressed through the extermination of the sinner and not through a
bloody sacrifice.[23]
When the Babylonians
attacked and destroyed the Temple, they desecrated it (Eze. 7:22; 25:3;
cf. 24:21). How was this profanation redressed? The Lord destroyed them
(Jer. 51:11; cf. Ps. 74:3-14), and later a new Temple was built for Him.
The death penalty was pronounced against
any Israelite who profaned the sanctuary (Eze. 23:39, 46-49; cf. Mal. 2:11,
12), the sacrificial offerings (Lev. 19:8; Num. 18:32), the Sabbath (Ex.
31:14), or the land (see Jer. 16:16-18). Atonement took place, so to speak,
through the death of the culprit (for example, see Num. 35:33; cf. Deut.
32:43; 2 Sam. 21:1-9). The death penalty was also required in cases of highhanded
sin that resulted in the illegal contamination of the sanctuary (Lev. 15:31;
20:2-5).
Daniel
applies this same legal principle to the desecrating power of the little
horn. The result of its evil actions would be rectified through a powerful
manifestation of the holiness and righteousness of God at the close of the
eschatological day of atonement, resulting in the little horn's extermination.
2.
The Year-Day Principle
Daniel
8:14 not only contains a reference to the eschatological day of atonement
but also includes a prophetic time period that informs us concerning the
historical moment when that event begins. "Until 2300 evenings and mornings.
. ."
a.
Evenings and Mornings
The
phrase "evenings and mornings" is seldom used in the Bible. The only other
place where we find the expression is in Genesis 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31,
where it is used to denote a full day. Based on that, some scholars have
suggested that "the natural way to understand the phrase [in Daniel] is
as denoting 2300 days."[24]
We
also know that in the sanctuary services certain activities were referred
to as taking place evening and morning, that is, every day (for example,
see Ex. 27:20, 21; Lev. 24:2, 3).[25] This again shows a connection between
Daniel 8:9-14 and the sanctuary services.
Should
we interpret the 2300 days in terms of the year-day principle? The text
itself points in this direction. The question of verse 13 asks, "Until when
the vision . . . ?" We saw already that "vision" in Daniel 8 designates
the whole vision, beginning with the ram, Medo-Persia. The 2300 days were
to start during the time of the Medo-Persian Empire and end at the time
when the eschatological day of atonement would begin. The fact that the
vision covers at least the history of two empires explicitly mentioned in
it (verses 20, 21) makes clear that the 2300 days cannot be literal days
but prophetic days--that is to say, years.[26]
b.
The Year-Day Principle in the Old Testament
Other places in the Bible validate the
year-day principle. In Scripture "day" can be used to designate a year.[27]
For instance, a yearly sacrifice is called "a sacrifice of days" (1 Sam.
20:6); a period of "a year and four months" (NIV) is worded as "days and
four months" (1 Sam. 27:7); an old person is one
"advanced
in days," which obviously means "advanced in years" (1 Kings 1:1, NIV).
in the poetic books we find days and years used in synonymous parallelism
(for example, see Job 10:5; 15:20; Ps. 90:9, 10).
An interesting case in which "day" stands
for "year" is found in the sabbatical law. The seventh year is called "a
sabbath of the Lord" (Lev. 25:2);
the name of a day is used to
refer to a year; the weekly Sabbath stands here for the sabbatical year.
In the
case of the jubilee, seven periods of sabbatical years were
followed by a jubilee year. "You shall count seven sabbaths of years, seven
years seven times, and to you
the days of the seven sabbaths of
years shall be forty-nine years" (verse 8). Here God is telling the Israelites
to interpret the 49 days as 49 years.
We also find a day standing for a year
in the context of prophecies of judgment. This principle is established
in Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6. In Numbers, 40 days become 40 years, while
in Ezekiel, 40 years are reduced to 40 days. However, in both cases we find
the same wording concerning the principle involved: "Day for a year, day
for a year I have given you." Another interesting example is registered
in the first prophecy of judgment found in the Bible. God announced to the
antediluvian world that its "days will be a hundred and twenty years" (Gen.
6:3, NIV). Here again we find a clear connection between "day" and "year,"
indicating that one stands for the other.
The evidence indicates that for the
Hebrew mentality it was natural to use "day" and "year" inter-changeably.
The Lord used the idea that a day could stand for a year in the apocalyptic
visions of Daniel as a symbol to refer to long prophetic periods. It is
interesting to observe that the year-day principle was also used by Jewish
writers during the intertestamental period, by those who lived in the Qumran
community, possibly by Josephus, and by some rabbinic writers.[28]
Based
on the biblical background we have just surveyed and on the internal evidence
of Daniel 8 itself, we may safely conclude that the 2300 days stand for
2,300 years. According to the prophecy, this long time period was to begin
some time during the Medo-Persian Empire. This serves to explain the omission
of Babylon from the vision. We find the specific date for the beginning
in Daniel 9.
II.
Daniel 8:14 and 9:23-27
A.
Links Between Daniel 8 and 9:23-27
Bible students generally
recognize that there is a connection between the content of Daniel 9 and
Daniel 8. No vision is recorded in chapter 9. Rather what we find there
is a discussion and interpretation of a 70-weeks prophetic time period.
This is preceded by an intercessory prayer offered by Daniel on behalf
of the city of Jerusalem and his people (Dan. 9:4-19). His concern is
addressed in the interpretation of the 70 weeks (verse 24). This time
prophecy is directly related to Daniel 8, particularly to the prophetic
time period recorded there, the 2300 years. A series of links used by
Daniel establishes a connection between the two prophetic periods.[29]
1.
Terminological Links
Daniel uses several key terms
used in both chapter 8 and 9:23-27. One of them is mar,eh,
"vision, appearance." Gabriel came to explain to Daniel the mar,eh
(Dan. 9:23). But in chapter 9 there is no vision. Therefore, the
angel is referring to a vision the prophet had had before. Mar,eh
is the same term used in Daniel 8:26 to designate the "vision" dealing
with the time period of the 2300 years. Interestingly, the part of the
vision (chazôn) in Daniel 8 that the prophet did not understand
was the one dealing with the 2300 years, which he calls the mar,eh
(verse 27). The verb he uses, bin ("to understand"), is
used again in Daniel 9:23 when Gabriel says to Daniel, "Understand [bin]
the vision [mar,eh]." In
other words, the angel came to assist Daniel in understanding what he
had not understood before in chapter 8.
Another term common to both chapters
is the name of the angel who interprets the meaning of the vision to Daniel,
namely, Gabriel. His explanation of the vision recorded in Daniel 8 was
not concluded at the end of the chapter. In response to the prophet's
prayer, he returned to provide more information.
2.
Sanctuary
Perspective
We have noticed already
that Daniel 8:9-14 uses sanctuary concepts to describe the work of the
Prince and the nature of the attack of the little horn. We find a similar
interest in the sanctuary in Daniel 9, with reference to expiation (verse
24), sacrificial offerings (verse 27), and the inauguration of the sanctuary
(verse 25). Daniel 9 mentions initiation of the sanctuary services
after the death of the Messiah. In Daniel 8 we find the Prince officiating
in that sanctuary as priest,
and also the little horn opposing His ministry, but we see the Prince
initiating the final phase of His priestly mediation at the end of the
2300 years.
The use of sanctuary concepts in Daniel
9 serves in part to describe the Messiah as a sacrificial victim and points
to the beginning of His priestly work. In chapter 8 the Messiah is described
as the high priest in charge of the daily and officiating in the eschatological
day of atonement. We should add that in chapter 7 the Messiah
is described as king.[30] Daniel's apocalyptic visions are essentially
about the work of Christ as sacrifice, priest, and king.
3. Time Element
The time element of
Daniel 8 was left unexplained. Daniel 9 includes a time element that is
a partial, but significant, explanation of the one found in Daniel 8.
The main emphasis of the time period in chapter 8 is on the close or end
of the prophecy. Daniel 9 stresses the beginning of the time period and
the events that lead to the inauguration of the work of the Messiah in
the heavenly sanctuary. Once that sanctuary was anointed (Dan. 9:24),
the daily ministry of the Prince began.
Both
prophetic periods begin during the time of the Medo-Persian Empire. Daniel
9 defines more precisely that historical moment by identifying it as the
time when the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem is issued (verse
25).
4.
The
Initial Verb of Daniel 9:24
According to the angel
interpreter, 70 weeks were "determined/cut off concerning your people
and your holy city." The verb used by Daniel is chathak, and
this is its only occurrence in the Hebrew Bible. Studies made of this
root in Canaanite literature and in Jewish Hebrew writings indicate that
it can mean both "determine" and "cut off."[31] The meaning of the verb
developed from a concrete action ("cut, cut off") to a more abstract one
("determine, decide," etc.). The more common meaning in those sources
seems to be "to cut, to cut off." The possibility that the meaning of
the verb in Daniel is "cut off" is strengthened by the fact that, as we
have seen, there are clear links connecting the time periods in Daniel
8 and 9. One could then suggest that the 70 weeks were cut off from the
2300 years mentioned in Daniel 8.
B. Content
of the 70 Weeks[32]
Daniel
9:24-27 is essentially a Messianic prophecy that announces the coming
of the Saviour and His saving work. Apart from the reference to the rebuilding
of the city (verse 25), the rest of the prophecy describes the experience
of the Messiah and provides a list of events that were to take place as
a result of His experience.
Toward
the end of the 70 weeks the Messiah was to be killed (verse 26). His death
would finish transgression by bringing in everlasting righteousness; seal/put
an end to sin through forgiveness; seal/confirm the veracity of the vision
through its fulfillment; atone for sin through His sacrifice; anoint the
heavenly sanctuary; make a strong, firm covenant with many (the new covenant);
and cause the sacrificial system of the earthly sanctuary to cease (the
type would meet the antitype). During the 70 weeks the destruction of
the city and the Temple was to be decreed (verses 26, 27).
This
prophecy was wonderfully fulfilled in Christ Jesus, who through His sacrificial
death brought eternal salvation and forgiveness of sin. He was resurrected,
and ascended to heaven to minister on our behalf in the heavenly sanctuary.
Thus the earthly sanctuary and its services came to an end, finding their
fulfillment in Christ. Rejected by His own people, He announced the destruction
of the city and the Temple (Matt. 24:1, 2).
C. The
Time Period: 70 Weeks
In
order to interpret the 70 weeks properly, the year-day principle is indispensable.
The Hebrew word shabucim, "weeks," always designates in the Old
Testament a seven-day period of time.[33] Here in Daniel the 70 weeks
form a single unity of uninterrupted time totaling 490 days (7 x 70 =
490). The prophecy itself provides for us the starting and ending points.
The prophetic period covers the time from the Medo-Persian Empire until
the anointing and death of the Messiah, including the establishment of
the new covenant, making salvation available to Jews and Gentiles together.[34]
1. The Decrees
More specifically the
prophecy begins with "the going forth of the word to restore and rebuild
Jerusalem" (Dan. 9:25). The phrase "the going forth of the word"
designates a royal decree (cf. Esther 1:19; 7:8). The decree was to authorize
the restoration of the city. The verb translated "to restore" does not
refer to the physical reconstruction of the city but rather to returning
the city to the Jews in order to administer it according to their own
laws (cf. 1 Kings 20:34; 2 Kings 14:22).[35] The reconstruction of the
city is indicated by the second verb "to rebuild."
The book of Ezra mentions several
Persian decrees authorizing the rebuilding of the Temple at Jerusalem,
but only one of them authorized the rebuilding of the city and the restoration
of the Israelite legal system. We find there a decree from Cyrus in 537
B.C. (Ezra 1:1-4), one by Darius in 520 B.C. (which was a reaffirmation
of the decree of Cyrus; Ezra 6:1-12), and the decree of Artaxerxes in
457 B.C. authorizing the full restoration of Jerusalem (Ezra 7:12-26).
This decree was renewed in 444 B.C. when Nehemiah was returning to Jerusalem
(Neh.1).
2.
The
Decree of Artaxerxes
Artaxerxes' decree in
457 B.C. included several important elements, most of which were not present
in the previous decrees. It (1) granted permission to the exiles to return
to Jerusalem; (2) funds were assigned for the support of the Temple; (3)
Temple and Temple personnel were tax-exempted; (4) Ezra was to investigate
the condition of the people of Judah, possibly in order to bring their
lives into agreement with the Mosaic law; (5) and he was to establish
a legal system based on the Torah for all the Jews in Judea and throughout
the Trans-Euphrates province. This last point included setting up magistrates
and judges to enforce the law.
The decree of 457 B.C. was comprehensive
enough to include the rebuilding of the city. Ezra tells us that the exiles
who had been authorized by Artaxerxes to return to Jerusalem began immediately
to rebuild it (Ezra 4:7-23; cf. Ezra 9:9). Their enemies were able to
stop the rebuilding process, not because the reconstruction of the city
was considered to be illegal, but because they feared that the power granted
by the king to the Jews would lead to insurrection. Several years later
Artaxerxes renewed the original decree and authorized Nehemiah to go to
Jerusalem to finish the project (Neh.1).
3. 457 B.C.:
Seventh Year of Artaxerxes
The seventh year of
the reign of Artaxerxes (457 B.C.) is a well-established date in ancient
history. According to Greek sources, Xerxes, the father of Artaxerxes,
died during the last part of 465 B.C. An Egyptian astronomical text suggests
that he died between December and the Persian new year in the spring.
Babylonian astronomical texts and papyrus documents found in the island
of Elephantine, in Egypt, confirm the fact that Artaxerxes ascended to
the throne in 465 B.C. That was his accession year; his first full year
as king began in the spring of 464 B.C.,
when the new year started. Artaxerxes' seventh year would then be 457
B.C.
Some
have suggested that during the postexilic period the Jews used a spring-to-spring
calendar and that, consequently, the seventh year of the king would be
458 B.C. The biblical evidence points to the opposite conclusion. Studies
made in the chronology of the kings of Judah indicate that the civil calendar
used in Jerusalem ran from fall to fall. This was also the case during
the exilic period (Eze. 1:2; 8:1; 40:1), and during the time of Ezra and
Nehemiah (Neh. 1:1; 2:1). Ezra's calendar was a fall-to-fall one, making
the seventh year of Artaxerxes 457 B.C.
4.
The
Chronology
Once we have fixed the date to start
the prophecies of the 70 weeks and the 2300 days, their chronology is
a simple matter. We can summarize it as follows:
| |
457
B.C. |
Decree
to restore and rebuild Jerusalem |
| |
408
B.C. |
7
weeks to rebuild the city (49 years) |
| |
A.D.
27 |
After
69 weeks the Prince was anointed (baptism of Jesus, Luke 3:1, 21)
(483 years) |
| |
A.D.
30/31 |
The
Messiah died during the last week (crucifixion of Christ) |
| |
A.D.
34 |
Stoning
of Stephen (Acts 6:12-7:60) and the gospel reaches the Gentile world
(Acts 9, 10). At some point during the rest of the 1810 years (2300-490
= 1810) the little horn interfered with the priestly work of the Prince
in the holy place (see Dan. 7:25; and 12:11). |
| |
A.D.
1844 |
The whole vision
of Daniel 8 is fulfilled.
The daily work of the Prince gives place to the eschatological
day of atonement.
The usurpation of the daily by the little horn comes to an end. |
This
is certainly an impressive prophecy, unique in the Bible. Its exact fulfillment
shows that God is indeed Lord of history and that He has not left us in
ignorance concerning the development of the plan of salvation within that
history. The prophecy is indeed interested in the work of our Lord and
Saviour, Jesus Christ. Through careful study of the Scriptures, intense
prayer, and the special guidance of the
Holy Spirit, our pioneers found in this prophecy about Christ the reason
for the existence of the remnant.
III.
The Meaning of Daniel 8:14[36]
It
was through the study of Daniel 8:14 as a point of departure that Adventism
came into existence as a historical movement, developed its doctrinal
identity, and identified its mission. We are confronted here with a foundational
and vital aspect in Adventist thought. This type of development was possible
because Daniel 8 includes a time prophecy that identifies 1844 as a significant
date in God's calendar and also because Daniel 8 and 9:23-27 point to
Christ's work of redemption. This saving task is connected in those passages
not only to the cross but also to Christ's ongoing mediatorial work in
the heavenly sanctuary. The exploration of the sanctuary services and
their symbolic meaning resulted in the Adventist doctrine of the sanctuary.
1.
Daniel 8:14 provides us as Adventists with a historical identity. The
Adventist movement is not a historical accident, but the result of God's
special intervention in human affairs. The fulfillment of Daniel 8:14
in 1844 validates, even legitimizes, its presence in the world and particularly
among the Christian community.
When Christ initiated His high priestly
work in heaven, the church was baptized by the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:33).
The disciples knew that something of transcendental importance had taken
place in heaven because the Spirit was poured on them. Likewise, when
the 2300-years prophecy was fulfilled in 1844, something unprecedented
took place in the heavenly sanctuary, namely, the antitypical
day of atonement had begun. At that moment God raised on earth a movement
of reform that would work with Him in preparing the world to meet Him
as judge, in restoring God's truth that had been cast to the ground, and
in unmasking Satan's last deception before the second coming of Christ
(Rev. 10:11; 14:7-12).
2. The historical identity, the theology,
and the mission of the Adventist movement cannot be separated from Christ's
redemptive work. It was precisely the work of Christ that made necessary
the creation of this movement. Therefore, it is Christ who provides identity
to the movement. The doctrine of the sanctuary is an exposition of God's
plan of salvation through Christ, and provides a foundational pillar to
the Adventist faith.
The sanctuary doctrine is a unique
perspective from which to study the plan of redemption. It illuminates
the development of that plan within history, identifying its key components
and, in conjunction with the prophecies of Daniel, even the historical
movement when they were to take place and the historical opposition from
God's enemies it confronted. This doctrine is centered in the work of
Christ and provides an integrated view of it. One can easily see progression
in Christ's work through the study of the theology of the sanctuary. He
is seen as sacrificial victim, high priest, mediator, judge, advocate,
and king.
3. The end of the 2300 years in 1844
reminds us that salvation history is still in progress, that God's plan
is developing as He planned and anticipated. Salvation history did not
come to an end in A.D. 31. Bible prophecies remind us that God was and
still is active within world history, leading it to its particular goal,
namely, the establishment of His kingdom on earth. The prophetic periods
serve as landmarks within history, signaling the moment when God's plan
of redemption is approaching its consummation.
4. Daniel 8:14 and the doctrine of
the sanctuary inform us that Christ is performing right now the last aspect
of His high priestly work in the heavenly sanctuary. We know where we
are with respect to what is transcending in heaven. The antitypical day
of atonement is in progress, and God is judging His people. We are reaching
the very end of God's mercy, and we are about to face the final confrontation
between the forces of God and Satan. The consummation of our salvation
is about to take place.
5. Christ's work of mediation and
judgment not only calls us to be aggressively involved in the proclamation
of God's eternal gospel in the setting of the three angels' messages,
hut it also challenges to evaluate our relationship with Christ. Our religious
experience should be characterized by a humble dependence on the Saviour
and by resting in faith in Him. While the heavenly sanctuary is being
cleansed, our spiritual life should be also cleansed from sin. This personal
cleansing takes place in repentance and forgiveness through Christ.
6. The investigative judgment going
on in heaven right now is a testimony to the fact that God and the universe
take every human being seriously. God, through Christ, deals with humans
in the heavenly sanctuary as individuals. This reaffirms our dignity and
value in Christ, who represents each one of us as our advocate. No human
being is an unknown in the divine council. The redeemed ones will join
the heavenly family not as strangers but as persons well known, as relatives
who have the sympathy and respect of the rest of God's family.
7. The investigative judgment signifies
that human decisions and actions have a cosmic impact. What we are, think,
and do is preserved indelibly in the heavenly records. This, far from
being a source of stress and fear, should be the very foundation of joy.
What we do, what we become is not lost in the vastness of time and space
but is preserved within God's sanctuary. Every good deed, every prayer,
every word of encouragement, every expression of love, is preserved as
a witness to the manifold wisdom of God, who is able to transform sinful
human beings into new and holy creatures. Of course, sin is also recorded
there. Human weaknesses, rebellions, errors, and failures are preserved
there. But because Christ is the believer's advocate, forgiveness is available
and is granted to those who approach God through Him. During the investigative
judgment, sins will not be counted against those who remained in a covenant
relationship with Christ, because they were charged to Him on the cross.
Then those sins will be blotted out, to be remembered no more. The Christlike
character of the believer will be fixed for eternity.
8. The cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary
points in a special way to the moral nature of our God. He who rules the
universe is a Person whose will is law, a law of love. He is the moral
arbiter of the universe, which, therefore is accountable to Him. The remnant
should find comfort in knowing that there is One in charge of the
cosmos and that He is all-powerful and all-love. In order to restore
and preserve order in the universe, judgment and accountability are indispensable.
Since judgment is based on God's law, the remnant characterize themselves
as those who keep the commandments of God as a loving response to His
grace.
9. The cleansing of the sanctuary
testifies to the fact that evil is not eternal. It will come to an end,
accompanied by the shouts of joy of God's loyal creatures praising His
justice and love. Only through justice and love can sin and evil be extinguished.
At the end of His ministry in the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary,
Christ will come to deliver His people from the power of death and from
their enemies. At that time Azazel-Satan will be recognized throughout
the universe as the source and origin of sin and evil and his extinction
will be decreed. The victory of God and the Lamb over the powers of Satan
will be final.
The saving significance of the cross
is enriched through a study of Christ's priesthood. Little is known about
the full impact and accomplishments of the cross. It is indeed
the greatest revelation of God to the universe and the indispensable event
in the resolution of the sin problem. But that revelation has not been
totally fathomed, and there are dimensions of it that will require eternity
to comprehend. Christ's priestly work in the heavenly sanctuary is constantly
uncovering the richness of the cross. In fact, His work of mediation and
judgment is simply and fundamentally an unfolding of the mystery of the
cross.
Endnotes
[1]. T.
Cuyler Young, Jr., "The Early History of the Medes and the Persians and
the Archaemenid Empire to the Death of Cambyses," in The Cambridge
Ancient History, ed. John Boardman, N. G. L. Hammond, D. M. Lewis,
and M. Ostwald (Cambridge: University Press, 1988), vol. 4, pp. 29-33.
[2]. John
E. Goldingay, in Daniel (Dallas: Word, 1989), p. 208, identifies
the third year of Belshazzar as 548/547. He is following Gerhard
F. Hasel, "The First and Third Years of Belshazzar (Dan. 7:1; 8:1)," Andrews
University Seminary Studies 15 (1977): 153-168.
[3]. Young, "Early History," p. 36.
[4]. This solution to the problem in verse 9 was suggested
by W. Shea, Selected Studies on Prophetic Interpretation, Daniel
and Revelation Committee Series (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald,
1982), vol. 1, pp. 41-43. He rightly points out that the Hebrew text reads
in verse 9 "and from one from them," not "of one of them." This reinforces
the idea that the little horn came from one of the winds of heaven.
[5]. Gerhard
F. Hasel, "The 'Little Horn," in Symposium on Daniel, Daniel
and Revelation Committee Series, ed. Frank B. Holbrook (Washington, D.C.:
Biblical Research Institute, 1986), vol. 2, p. 394.
[6]. For
a discussion on the stages of growth of the little horn, see Shea, "Spatial
Dimensions in the Vision of Daniel 8," in Symposium on Daniel, pp.496-526;
and Hasel, "Little Horn," pp. 380-383.
[7]. Goldingay,
p. 197.
[8]. F.
Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon
of the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press,1951), p.
680.
[9]. See John J. Collins, Daniel:A Commentary
on the Book of Daniel (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), p. 335.
[10]. Ibid.
[11]. R. Knierim, "pesac Verbrechen," in Theologisches
Handwörterbuch zum Alten Testament, ed. Ernst Jenni and Claus
Westerman (Munich: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 197[106), vol. 2, col.
493
[12]. See Hasel, "Little Horn," p. 429.
[13]. Bruce C. Waltke and M. O'Connor, An Introduction
to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, md.: Eisenbrauns, 1990),
p. 215.
[14]. See Shea, Studies, pp. 80-82.
[14]. See F. Stolz, "Smmöde liegen," in Theologisches
Handuörterbuch zum Alten Testament, vol.2, cols. 971-974."
[16]. See, for instance, E. R. Achtemeier, "Righteousness in
the Old Testament;" in The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible,
ed. G. A. Buttrick (Nashville: Abingdon, 1962), vol. 4, pp. 80-85;
K. Koch, "Sdq gemeinschaftstreu/heilvoll sein," Theologisches
Handuörterbuch zum Alten Testament, vol.2, cols. 507-530; J.
J. Scullion, "Righteousness: Old Testament," in The Anchor
Bible Dictionary, ed. David N. Freedman (New York: Doubleday, 1992),
vol. 5, pp. 724-736; J. P. Justesen, "On the Meaning of SADAQ,"
Andrews University Seminary Studies 2 (1964): 53-61; Hasel, "Little
Horn," pp. 448-454.
[17]. Achtemeier, p. 81.
[18]. Ibid., p. 83.
[19]. Koch, col. 522.
[20]. See Scullion, p. 731.
[21]. See Justesen, pp. 58-61; Koch, cols. 519-525;
Angel M. Rodriguez, "Significance of the Cultic Language in Daniel
8:9-14," in Symposium on Daniel, pp. 537-543; Gerhard F. Hasel,
"Studies in Biblical Atonement I," in The Sanctuary and the Atonement,
ed. A. V. Wallenkampf (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1981),
pp. 87-114.
[22]. See Angel M. Rodríguez, "Transfer of Sin in Levitiucs,"
in The Seventy Weeks, Leviticus, and the Nature of Prophecy, ed.
Frank B. Holbrook (Washington, D.C.: Biblical Research Institute, 1986),
pp. 169-197; A. Treiyer, The Day of Atonement and the Heavenly Judgment
(Arkansas: Creation Enterprises International), pp. 167-196.
[23]. On this, see the excellent material prepared by
Alberto Treiyer, "The Day of Atonement as Related to the Contamination
and Purification of the Sanctuary," The Seventy Weeks, pp. 198-247.
[24]. Goldingay, p. 213; cf. M. Saebo, "Yôm," in
Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, ed. G.
J. Botterweck and H. Ringgren (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), vol. 6,
p. 21; and Ernst Jenni, "Yôm Tag," Theologisches Handwôrterbuch
zum Alten Testament, vol. 1, col. 710. See especially S. J. Schwantes,
" cEreb Boger of Daniel 8:14 Re-examined," Symposium
on Daniel, pp. 472-474.
[25]. See Shea, "Unity of Daniel," Symposium on Daniel,
p. 197.
[26]. See Shea, Studies, pp. 80-83.I am indebted to
him in what follows.
[27]. Jenni, col. 722, mentions the fact that "day" is used
idiomatically for "year" in the Old Testament about 876 times. This is
supported by Saebo, p. 21.
[28]. See Shea, Studies, pp. 89-93; and Brempong Owusu-Antwi,
"An Investigation of the Chronology of Daniel 9:24-27" (Ph.D. Diss., Andrews
University, 1993), pp. 140-146.
[29]. On the links between Daniel 8 and 9, see W. Shea, "The
Relationship Between the Prophecies of Daniel 8 and Daniel 9," in The
Sanctuary and the Atonement, pp.228-250; G. Hasel, "Little Horn,"
pp. 436-439; Jacques Doukhan, "The Seventy Weeks of Daniel 9: An Exegetical
Study," in Sanctuary and Atonement, pp. 253-255.
[30]. This was suggested by Shea, "Unity," Sanctuary and
Atonement, pp. 238-240.
[31]. See Shea, "Relationship," Sanctuary and Atonement,
pp. 241-246.
[32]. On the interpretation of the 70 weeks, see Doukhan,
"Seventy Weeks," Sanctuary and Atonement, pp. 251-276; and C.
Mervyn Maxwell, God Cares: The Message of Daniel (Pacific Press,
1981), vol. 1, pp. 189-223.
[33]. For an analysis and discussion of the meaning and
significance of the plural "weeks" in Daniel, see Shea, Studies, pp.
74-77; Gerhard F. Hasel, "The Hebrew Masculine Plural for 'Weeks' in the
Expression 'Seventy Weeks' in Daniel 9:24," Andrews University Seminary
Studies 31 (1993): 105-118.
[34]. For a study of the chronology of this prophecy,
see Shea, "The Prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27," in Seventy Weeks, pp.
75-118.
[35]. On this, see Owusu-Antwi, Investigation,
pp. 173.177. For recent studies by Adventist scholars on the commencement
date for the 70 weeks, see Arthur Ferch, "Commencement Date for the Seventy
Weeks Prophecy," in Seventy Weeks, pp. 65-74; W. Shea, "When
Did the Seventy Weeks of Daniel 9:24 Begin?" in Symposium on Revelation,
ed. Frank B. Holbrook (Sliver Spring, Md.: Biblical Research Institute,
1992), vol. 1, pp. 375-394; Owusu-Antwi, "Investigation," pp. 11-69; Angel
M. Rodríguez, "The 70 Weeks and 457 B.C." (can be obtained through the
Biblical Research Institute).
[36]. On the meaning of the doctrine of the sanctuary
and the investigative judgment, see William G. Johnsson, "'What the Sanctuary
Doctrine Means," Adventist Review, May 14, 1981, p. 13; May 28,
1981, pp. 13,14; June 11,1981, pp. 11, 12; June 25, l981, p. 17; July
9, 1981, pp. 13, 14; July 23, 1981, pp. 14, 15; "Eschatology
and the Church,"Adventist Review, Nov. 26, 1981, p. 11; and W.
Shea, "Theological Importance of the Preadvent Judgment," in Seventy
Weeks, pp. 323-331.
Published by the General Conference
of Seventh-day Adventists
in cooperation with the Adventist Review, September 1994.
Copyright © General Conference of SDA 1994