A. F. Ballenger
1909
PREFACE
Four years ago the writer was separated from the ministry of the Seventh-Day Adventist
Church, and from fellowship in that body, because of convictions entertained regarding the
mediatorial work of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary.
When asked by the brethren what my future plans would be, I replied that I would go
aside and labor with my hands and earn my bread, and that of my family, with the sweat of
my face, and see how my convictions would stand the test of stress and storm, of toil and
time. I told them that I would not then become aggressive, but as my friends and
acquaintances in the denomination should ask the reason of the hope that is within me, I
would try to give it in meekness and fear.
Besides, it seemed but fair to give the brethren time to carefully examine my position
and refute it from the Word if they were able. This I did in response to their pleas
that, while I had given the subject much study, they had not had time to carefully
consider it.
I have failed to respond to all the calls of my brethren and sisters for copies of my
manuscript, as my time and strength have been largely taken up in providing food, clothing
and shelter for my family. When the crisis came, it found me in the position of most
of the earlier ministers of the denomination, without means for the care of my
family. But this will not excuse my failure to answer the calls for copies of my
position. If I had always sought first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness,
"all these things" would have been added, as in many cases they were: and I
hereby testify to the faithfulness of God and the kindness of his children in this matter.
I have felt condemned when friends, anxious to possess copies of the manuscript, have
gone to the expense of time and means to make copies for themselves, and it is for this
reason that the matter now appears in print.
Yes, dear reader, it is possible for me to be in error in these things, but it would be
feigned humility to appear not to believe them with all my heart; for I do believe them,
and have shown my faith by sacrificing for them all that the human heart holds dear, save
life itself.
Now let the reader follow the noble Bereans in searching the Scriptures to see whether
these things are so, and if they are found to be in harmony with the Word, believe them;
if not, reject them, and then like one who is his brother's keeper, attempt to show the
writer where his convictions of truth contradict the plain "thus saith the
Lord."
To the timid soul, whose love of peace and unity leads him to fear the consequences
that may follow an investigation of the subject, let me say there is something more
blessed than church conformity, and that is the stately, triumphant, onward march of
truth; something more to be desired than stagnant peace, and that is a Jerusalem Council,
a Diet of Spires, or a Minneapolis Conference, from whose "No small dissentions and
disputations," truth, less shackled, bounds onward toward the perfect day.
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I came not to send peace but a
sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter
against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.
Matt. 10:34,35.
The reader is urged to read the following quotation from the pen of Mrs. E. G. White
(Test. 33, pp. 234-236), as presenting the writer's convictions on this important subject.
Peter exhorts his brethren to
"grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ."
When the people of God are growing in grace they will be constantly obtaining a clearer
understanding of his Word. They will discern new light and beauty in its sacred
truths. This has been true in the history of the church in all ages, and thus it
will continue to the end. But as real spiritual life declines, it has ever been the
tendency to cease to advance in the knowledge of the truth. Men rest satisfied with
the light already received from God's Word and discourage any further investigation of the
scriptures. They become conservative and seek to avoid discussion.
The fact that there is no
controversy or agitation among God's people, should not be regarded as conclusive evidence
that they are holding fast to sound doctrine. There is reason to fear that they may
not be clearly discriminating between truth and error. When no new questions are
started by investigation, when no difference of opinion arises which will set men to
searching the Bible for themselves, to make sure that they have the truth there will be
many now, as in ancient times who will hold to tradition and worship they know not what.
I have been shown that many who
profess to have a knowledge of present truth, know not what they believe. They do
not understand the evidences of their faith ... When the time of trial shall come,
there are men now preaching to others, who will find, upon examining the positions they
hold, that there are many things for which they can give no satisfactory reason.
Until thus tested they know not their great ignorance. And there are many in the
church who take it for granted that they understand what they believe, but, until
controversy arises they do not know their own weakness. When separated from those of
like faith, and compelled to stand singly and alone to explain their belief they will be
surprised to see how confused are their ideas of what they had accepted as truth.
Certain it is that there has been among us a departure from the living God, and a turning
to men, putting human in the place of divine wisdom.
God will arouse his people; if
other means fail, heresies will come in among them which will sift them, separating the
chaff from the wheat. The Lord calls upon all who believe his word to awake out of
sleep. Precious light has come appropriate for this time. This light should
lead us to a diligent study of the Scriptures and a most critical examination of the
positions which we hold...... God
would have all the bearings and positions of truth thoroughly and perseveringly searched,
with prayer and fasting. Believers are not to rest in suppositions and ill defined
ideas of what constitutes truth. Their faith must be founded on the Word of God.
Your brother in Christ,
A. F. BALLENGER.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTORY.
No one who has not experienced it can realize the soul anguish that overwhelms one, who,
in the study of the Word finds truth which does not harmonize with that which he has
believed and taught during a whole lifetime to be vital to the salvation of the
soul. This is the position to which I have been brought by a most earnest and
prayerful study of the Word, and I am stating my difficulties in this pamphlet, praying
that, if there is light that will harmonize the old position with the new, or show the new
position to be unscriptural, the reader may be able to make it plain to me. I appeal
by this to those in places of greatest responsibility down to the humblest believer in
present truth. I care not through whom the help may come, only so it come. I
fear not the valley of humility, for those who have read the little book Power for
Witnessing, know that in my Christian experience there set forth, my greatest
victories were gained through humbling myself under the mighty hand of God. I plead
with my brethren and sisters not to condemn me suddenly, but to examine carefully the
scriptures which have led me to take the position I have, and if possible, see wherein I
have missed the path of truth.
From a child I have been taught to demand a "Thus saith the Lord" in proof of
every doctrine, and I have looked forward to the time when the great controversy should
reach its crisis, and we would be called upon to stand for our lives, at which time, we
have been taught that we should say, when the powers of earth demand submission to the
laws of men in opposition to the law of God, "Show us from the Word our
error." I repeat, all my life long I have been taught that "before
accepting any doctrine or precept we should demand a plain 'Thus saith the Lord' in its
support"; that
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 decrees or decisions of ecclesiastical
councils, as numerous and discordant as are the churches which they represent, and the
voices of the majority, -- not one or 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...
Though the Reformation gave the Scriptures to all, yet the selfsame principle which was
maintained by Rome prevents multitudes in Protestant churches from searching the Bible for
themselves. They are taught to accept its teachings as interpreted by the Church,
and there are thousands who dare receive nothing, however plainly revealed in the
Scriptures, that is contrary to their creed or the established teaching of their
church. There are today, thousands of professors of religion who can give no other
reason for points of faith which they hold than that they were so taught by their
religious leaders. They pass by the Savior's teachings almost unnoticed, and place
implicit confidence in the words of the ministers.
But are ministers infallible? How can we trust our souls to their guidance,
unless we know from God's Word that they are light-bearers?
A lack of moral courage to step aside from the beaten track of the world leads
many to follow in the steps of learned men and by their reluctance to investigate for
themselves, they are becoming hopelessly fastened in the chains of error.
CHAPTER II.
"ON THE
THRONE"
My first difficulty with the doctrines taught by Seventh-Day Adventists is the teaching
that Christ began his ministry at his ascension, in the first apartment of the heavenly
sanctuary. All my life I have believed that he did, but that belief was not the
result of personal investigation of the Scriptures, but was the result of accepting as
truth the deductions of others. As, in the quotations given above, I trusted to my
religious teachers and did not investigate for myself. When I came to present these
things to the general public and to defend them with the Word of God, I found myself in
difficulty.
The Scriptures of truth again and again declare in the most explicit terms that Christ,
at his ascension, went directly to the Father's throne. And this he must do that the
scriptures be not broken, for God himself, by the mouth of David, had long ago published
to the world that he would invite his Son to share his throne when he returned from the
earth after completing the work of redemption. Here is the invitation:
The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine
enemies thy footstool.
Ps. 110:1.
The New Testament writers unite in testifying that this predicted invitation was given
and accepted at the ascension of Christ. Peter applied this scripture to his
ascended Lord in his Pentecostal sermon, thus:
For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, the Lord said
unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand until I make thy foes thy footstool.
Acts 2:34,35.
The Apostle Paul repeatedly refers to this exaltation of Christ to the right hand of
the throne of God. Some of those references follow:
When he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the
majesty on high.
Heb. 1:2.
But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand until I
make thine enemies thy footstool.
Heb. 1:13.
Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an High
Priest who is set on the right hand of the throne of the majesty in the heavens.
Heb. 8:1.
But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on
the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting till his enemies he made his footstool.
Heb. 10:12,13.
Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy set
before him, endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down on the right hand of
the throne of God.
Heb. 12:2.
Which he wrought in Christ when he raised him from the dead and set him at his
own right hand in heavenly places.
Eph.
1:20.
If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ
sitteth at the right hand of God.
Col.
3:1.
As the Psalmist David was used to proclaim the prophetic promise of God to seat his Son
on his throne at his ascension, so the beloved Apostle John was used by the Son to testify
that his Father had fulfilled his promise, as follows:
To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne even as I also
overcame and AM SET down with my Father in his throne.
Rev.
3:21.
The martyr Stephen closed his testimony and sealed his doom with this glorious truth,
so much emphasized in the apostolic teaching:
But he being full of the Holy Ghost looked steadfastly into heaven and saw the
glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, and said, Behold, I see the
heavens opened, and the Son of God standing on the right hand of God. Then they
cried out with a loud voice and stopped their ears and ran upon him with one accord, and
cast him out of the city and stoned him.
Acts 7:55,58.
From the foregoing it is evident that in the apostolic church, a church filled with the
Holy Spirit, the fact that Christ at his ascension, sat down on his Father's throne, was a
most important gospel truth. This gospel truth is the "chief point" of the
whole epistle to the Hebrews, as stated in Heb. 8:1.
Now in the things we are saying, the chief point is this: We have such a high
priest, who sat down on the right hand of the throne of the majesty in the heavens, a
minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man.
Heb. 8:1.
(Both Revised and
American Standard.)
Which is the "Throne
Room"? |
The next all important question is, Which apartment of the heavenly sanctuary contains the
throne of God? which apartment is the "throne room" of Jehovah?
In the Mosaic sanctuary, the pattern of the true tabernacle, God's dwelling place in
heaven, the throne of God abode in the second apartment.
Let them make me a tabernacle that I may dwell among them.
Ex. 25:8.
And thou shalt put the mercy seat ABOVE UPON THE ARK, and in the ark thou shalt
put the testimony which I shall give thee. And THERE will I meet with thee, and I
will commune with thee from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubims which are
UPON THE ARK of the testament, of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto
the children of Israel.
Ex. 25:21,23.
Inasmuch as the Mosaic tabernacle was a shadow of the heavenly sanctuary, it follows
that the "throne-room" of God in the heavenly sanctuary is in the second
apartment. The following quotation is in harmony with this Scriptural truth:
In the sanctuary and the temple, that were the earthly symbols of God's dwelling
place, one apartment was sacred to his presence. The veil inwrought with cherubims
at its entrance, was not to be lifted by any hand save one. To lift that veil, and
intrude unbidden into the sacred mysteries of the most holy place, was death. For
above the mercy seat and the bowed, worshiping angels, DWELT THE GLORY of the Holiest,
glory upon which no man might look and live. On the one day of the year appointed
for ministry in the most holy place, the high priest, with trembling, entered God's
presence, while clouds of incense veiled the glory from his sight.
Testimonies to the Church,
Vol. 8, page 284.
And beyond the second veil was the Holy Shekinah, the visible manifestation of
God's glory, before which none but the high priest could enter and live. The
matchless splendor of the earthly tabernacle reflected to human vision the glories of that
temple where Christ our forerunner ministers for us BEFORE THE THRONE OF GOD.
Great Controversy,
page 414.
In the temple in heaven, the dwelling place of God, his throne is established in
righteousness and judgment. In the most holy place is his law, the great rule of
right by which mankind are tested. The ark that enshrines the tables of the law, is
covered with the mercy seat, BEFORE WHICH CHRIST PLEADS HIS BLOOD in the sinner's behalf.
Ibid., page 415.
Nowhere in the Scriptures are we taught that the throne of God dwelt in the first
apartment, either of the earthly or heavenly sanctuary. The earthly sanctuary was a
shadow of the heavenly; and the reason why the shadowy throne was in the second apartment
in that sanctuary, is that the real throne was in the second apartment of the real
sanctuary in heaven. It therefore follows that since Christ at his ascension, sat
down as priest on his Father's throne in the heavenly sanctuary, he must have entered into
the holy of holies, "within the veil" at that time.
Those who are well informed regarding the teachings of the Seventh-Day Advent denomination
will be prepared to admit that when Christ ascended, he sat down on the throne with his
Father in the heavenly sanctuary; but some of these will maintain that the throne of God
was moved from the holy of holies to the first apartment at that time, and there remained
until 1844. However, there are a goodly number, even of ministers, who have
expressed surprise when it was stated that this was the denomination's position.
One minister who has preached the message for many years, writes as follows concerning
this point:
I am sure there cannot be found a single line in any book, pamphlet or
periodical, written by our people, that ever intimates that the throne of God ever abode
in the holy place or first apartment; and I have never heard it mentioned either in public
or private... It is the most unscriptural position that could be taken and involves
more unreasonable and absurd positions than the Sunday keeper offers for keeping
Sunday. Why was one part of the sanctuary called "the most holy
place"? Was it not because that part contained the throne of God which was
between the cherubim over the mercy seat under which was the constitution of the
universe? Now, if the throne made that place most holy, then if it be moved into the
first apartment, would it not make that apartment the most holy place?
For the benefit of those who desire, like the brother referred to above, a definite
statement from the denomination in proof that it teaches that the throne of God was in the
first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary at the ascension of Christ, the following is
submitted:
When Christ commenced his ministry above, on the throne of his Father, that
throne was in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary.
Looking Unto Jesus,
page 134.
Thus the scene opens with the commencement of Christ's ministry, and at that
time the throne of God was in the first apartment of the sanctuary, where the antitype of
the golden candlestick was seen.
Ibid.
This teaching that God's throne was in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary,
raises some very serious questions.
If the throne of God was moved into the first apartment at the ascension of Christ, did
that include the ark?
The denomination, through its Sabbath School lessons, has taught that the ark with its
mercy seat, its cherubim, and its shekinah, was a representation of God upon his throne in
the heavenly sanctuary. In the Sabbath School lessons for Feb. 8, 1890, questions 12
and 13, the following appears:
12. What was the cover of the ark called ? -- Heb. 9:5; Ex. 25:21.
13. Why was it called the mercy seat ? -- Ans. It was there
that mercy was dispensed. The sanctuary was God's dwelling place; the ark
represented his throne; and from his throne he dispenses grace, or favor, or mercy.
See Heb. 4:16.
Again, in Bible Reading Gazette, authorized by resolution of the General
Conference and published in book form in 1888, is found the following:
What was there in the type that represented God on his throne in heaven?
Lev. 16:2. And the Lord said unto Moses, Speak unto Aaron, thy brother, that he come
not at all times into the holy place within the veil before the mercy seat which is upon
the ark, that he die not; for I will appear in the cloud upon the mercy seat.
Reading No. 1, The Sanctuary.
Sub-question 14, under
Question 92.
And still again:
21. What covered the ark in the worldly sanctuary? -- Exodus
25:17,21. (The mercy seat.)
22. What covered it in the heavenly? -- Heb. 10:19,20; 4:19.
(The throne of grace).
Reading 101, questions 21, 22.
If this teaching of the denomination be true and the mercy seat of Exodus is a type of
the throne of grace of Heb 4:16 then it must follow that if the throne of God was located
in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary from the ascension of Christ to 1844;
then the real ark was in the first apartment during all that time. But this does
violence to the type which put the ark in the second apartment with a veil between it and
the rest of the furniture of the sanctuary.
It also does violence to the type by putting all the furniture of the heavenly
sanctuary in one apartment and leaving the holy of holies empty and abandoned for eighteen
centuries.
Separating the Throne
from the Ark |
Some have seen the dilemma into which this teaching leads, and have tried to escape the
difficulty by separating the throne of God from the ark of God, and placing the throne of
God in the first apartment in the heavenly sanctuary, and leaving the ark of God in the
holy of holies as represented in the type. While this relieves the situation in the
one direction, it greatly complicates it in another.
If God moved his throne from the holy of holies at the ascension of Christ, did he
leave the mercy seat or throne of grace behind him in the holy of holies? And did he
then minister the gospel for eighteen centuries from another seat than the mercy seat,
from another throne than the throne of grace?
If the throne was moved into the first apartment and not the ark containing the law,
was the gospel ministered for eighteen centuries divorced from the law?
In the type all gospel ministry centered at the mercy seat above the law, as is
forcibly stated in the following quotations:
Beyond the veil was the holy of holies, where centered the symbolic service of
atonement and intercession; and which formed the connecting link between heaven and earth.
Great Controversy,
p. 348.
The law of God enshrined within the ark, was the great rule of righteousness and
judgment. The law pro- nounced death upon the transgressor; but above the law was
the mercy seat, upon which the presence of God was revealed, and from which, by virtue of
the atonement, pardon was granted to repentant sinners. Thus in the work of Christ
for our redemption symbolized by the sanctuary service, mercy and truth are met together;
righteousness and peace have kissed each other.
Patriarchs and Prophets,
p. 349.
Beyond the second veil, the sacred ark with its mystic cherubim, and above it
the holy shekinah, the visible manifestation of Jehovah's presence, all but a dim
reflection of the glorious temple of God in heaven, the great center of the work for man's
redemption.
Ibid.
It is not without significance that the mercy seat and the law of God were so
closely associated, and that God's presence was manifested just above them between the
cherubim. Here all the services of the sanctuary centered. Here the presence,
character and government of God was represented. The law of God is the "justice
and judgment" which are the habitation of his throne.
Note 2, under S.S. Lessons
for Jan. 26, 1895.
Moving Salvation's Center |
At this point there arises to the thoughtful mind a number of serious questions:
1st. If God moved his throne into the first apartment at
the ascension of Christ, and left the sacred ark enshrining his law and covered by the
mercy seat, did he move the center of salvation away from the law and mercy seat into
another apartment?
2nd. Did God minister pardon for eighteen centuries
from a throne which was not the mercy seat but which was separated from that mercy seat by
a separating veil?
3rd. Did God minister the gospel for eighteen centuries
from a seat whose foundation was not his eternal law, from a throne which was divorced
from that law by a veil of separation?
4th. Did God pardon sin from another seat than the one
which is the habitation of justice and judgment?
5th. If God could minister the gospel for eighteen
centuries divorced from the law, why can he not continue to do it; as taught by the No-Law
advocates?
6th. Did Christ as High Priest plead his blood for
eighteen centuries before a throne whose foundation was not the broken law which demanded
the transgressor's blood?
7th. Did Christ minister his blood before a throne
where mercy and truth did not meet together, and where righteousness and peace did not
kiss each other?
Does the reader not see that this doctrine which moves the throne from the holy of holies
into the first apartment, divorces God and his Son from the mercy seat and the law, and
changes the center of God's government and gospel from the mercy-covered law in the holy
of holies to the first apartment which according to the type never contained either law or
mercy seat; and that for a period of eighteen hundred years?
This latter horn of the dilemma is much more serious than the former. The first
did violence to the type by moving the ark to the first apartment, and thereby making that
apartment contain all the furniture of both apartments and leaving the holy of holies
empty and desolate; but it still recognized that the law and the gospel are inseparable,
that there can be no salvation which does not have its center at the mercy seat above the
law. But this latter theory separates God and his Son from the ark of his testament,
from his law and mercy seat, and centers the plan of salvation in a department of the
heavenly sanctuary where abode neither God's holy law nor his mercy seat.
The Difficulty Un- explained |
Some of my brethren have tried to make it appear that I was in error in my teaching, that
at his ascension Christ entered "within the veil" and sat down on the
antitypical mercy seat or throne of grace in the holy of holies in the heavenly sanctuary,
by stating that God's throne is movable and living and not immovably fixed to any one
place in the heavenly sanctuary. No one, with the most rudimentary knowledge of the
Scriptures, would think of denying that God's throne is living and movable. The
question is not, Is God's throne movable? But, Is the holy of holies in the heavenly
sanctuary, the center of atonement and intercession, as was taught in the type?
Some time ago I met a member of the General Conference Committee and he raised the
issue over which I was cast out from the denomination as unclean.
He said in substance, "Bro. Ballenger, do you not know that God's throne is living
and movable, and could therefore easily be moved from the holy of holies into the first
apartment?"
To which I replied in substance: "No one denies that the throne of God is living
and movable, but the question is, Did God move his throne into the first apartment? and if
so Did he move the mercy seat and the law? or Did he leave the mercy seat and the law
behind, and minister the gospel from a throne separated from his law and mercy seat?"
After a few moments' reflection he replied, "I had not given that point any
thought."
During the last four years I have laid this difficulty before the leading men of the
denomination and no one has ventured an explanation. No one has dared to say that
when the throne was moved out into the first apartment the ark and law went with it; and
on the other hand no one has dared to affirm that the law and mercy seat were deserted
-- left behind in the holy of holies, while the gospel was ministered for eighteen
hundred years from a seat which was not the mercy seat and from a throne divorced from the
divine law by a separating veil. Reader, if you accept the plain, "thus saith
the Lord," you need not tamper with the throne of the Infinite but leave it in the
holy of holies above the law, "the great center of the work for man's
redemption," where the whole testimony of Scripture places it.
On the day of atonement, the high priest, having taken an offering from the
congregation, went into the most holy place with the blood, and sprinkled it upon the
mercy seat above the tables of the law. Thus the claims of the law which
demanded the life of the sinner, were satisfied.
Patriarchs and Prophets,
p. 356.
In view of the foregoing and the many Scriptures which declare that Christ sat down
with his Father on his throne, within the veil, at his ascension, some serious questions
arise.
Did Christ sit down "On the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the
heavens" before the law, which demanded the life of the sinner, and which is the
foundation of that throne, was satisfied?
Did the law continue to claim the life of the sinner's substitute, the Son of God, for
eighteen hundred years after he had "offered one sacrifice for sins forever" and
"set down on the right of God?"
Did Christ remain under the curse of the law for eighteen hundred years after his
exaltation to the throne of God? If he had not sprinkled his blood upon the mercy
seat, thereby satisfying the claims of the law, could he be said to be free from its
curse?
The law enshrined within the ark, was the great rule of righteousness and
judgment. That law pronounced death upon the transgressor; but above the law was the
mercy seat, upon which the presence of God was revealed, and from which by virtue of the
atonement, pardon was granted to the repentant sinner. Thus in the work of Christ
for our redemption, symbolized by the sanctuary services, mercy and truth are met
together, righteousness and peace have kissed each other.
Patriarchs and Prophets,
p. 349.
Since mercy (the gospel) and truth (the law) met together at the throne of grace above
the law, did Christ our great High Priest sit down upon that throne before he sprinkled
the blood upon the mercy seat which caused mercy and truth to meet together, and
righteousness and peace to kiss each other?
Or did God separate mercy from truth? Did he move his throne away from the law
into the first apartment and minister mercy for eighteen hundred years divorced from the
law by a separating veil? Before investigating further, let the reader ponder the
following glorious gospel words, descriptive of the ascension of Christ and his reception
at his Father's throne.
After describing the triumphal ascension of Christ and the eagerness of the heavenly
host to glorify their King, we read:
But he waves them back. Not
yet; he cannot now receive the coronet of glory and the royal robe. He enters into
the presence of his Father. He points to his wounded head, the pierced side, the
marred feet: He lifts his hands bearing the prints of the nails. He points to the
tokens of his triumph; he presents to God the wave sheaf, those raised with him as
representatives of that great multitude who shall come forth from the grave at his second
coming. He approaches the Father, with whom there is joy over one sinner that
repents; who rejoiceth over one with singing. Before the foundations of the earth
were laid, the Father and the Son had united in a covenant to redeem man if he should be
overcome by Satan. They had clasped their hands in a solemn pledge that Christ
should become the surety for the human race. This pledge Christ has fulfilled.
When upon the cross he cried out, "It is finished," he addressed the
Father. The compact had been fully carried out. Now, he declares,
"Father, it is finished. I have done thy will, O my God. I have completed
the work of redemption. If thy justice is satisfied, I will that they also whom thou
hast given me be with me where I am."
The voice of God is heard proclaiming
that justice is satisfied. Satan is vanquished. Christ's toiling struggling
ones on earth are accepted in the beloved. Before the heavenly angels and the
representatives of unfallen worlds they are declared justified. Where he is, there
his church shall be. "Mercy and truth have met together righteousness and peace
have kissed each other." The Father's arm encircled his Son and word is given
"Let all the angels of God worship him."
Desire of Ages,
p. 834.
Could this glorious scene take place at the throne of the universe, and the voice of
God be heard proclaiming that "justice is satisfied," -- could the sinner
be "declared justified" "before the heavenly angels and the representatives
of unfallen worlds" while the law was still demanding the life of the sinner's
substitute, the triumphant Son of God?
The Throne in the
Book of Revelation |
A desperate effort is made to find scriptural proof that Christ sat upon the throne with
his Father in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary until 1844. The
Scriptures used are as follows:
And behold there was a throne set in heaven and one sitting upon the throne. .
. And there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne.
Rev. 4:2,5. R.V.
And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there
was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints
upon the golden altar which was before the throne.
Rev. 8:3.
It is argued that inasmuch as the candlestick and the altar of incense were always in
the first apartment of the earthly sanctuary, therefore when these were seen by John in
the heavenly sanctuary, he must have been looking into the first apartment; and as he saw
the throne at the same time, the throne must have been in the first apartment.
But the logic is faulty. One might just as consistently argue that inasmuch as
the second apartment was always the abode of the ark or typical throne, therefore when
John saw the altar and candlestick at the same time that he saw the throne, they must have
been in the second apartment. But both conclusions are wrong, for both contradict
the type because in the type, the ark, or typical throne was never seen in the first
apartment; and the altar and candlestick were never seen in the second apartment.
The candlestick and altar as seen by John, were in the exact position they occupied in
the earthly sanctuary, and the throne in the exact position it occupied in that
sanctuary. In the earthly sanctuary, the candlestick was in the first apartment
before the veil, "before the Lord," and the altar was "before the
ark."
Note the two following Scriptures and see how the earthly sanctuary as built by Moses
agreed with the heavenly sanctuary as seen by John, as regards the relative positions of
the altar and the throne. Moses placed "the golden altar for incense before the
ark." Ex. 40:5. John saw "the golden altar (for incense) before the
throne." Rev. 8:3.
But it may be asked, How could John see the throne at the same time he saw the altar
unless the throne were moved out into the first apartment, or the altar moved into the
second? For the simple gospel reason that when Christ died on Calvary as the
antitype of the Lord's goat, the veil of the temple was rent from the top to the bottom;
symbolizing the rending of the heavenly veil that our great High Priest might enter within
the veil and offer his blood at the mercy seat or throne of grace.
But this man, after that he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down
on the right hand of God.
Heb. 10:12.
The rending of the veil of the temple showed that the Jewish sacrifices and
ordinances would no longer be received. The great sacrifice had been offered, and
had been accepted, and the Holy Spirit which descended on the day of Pentecost carried the
minds of the disciples from the earthly sanctuary to the heavenly, where Jesus had entered
by his own blood, to shed upon his disciples the benefits of his atonement.
Early Writings,
page 122.
Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul both sure and steadfast, and which
entereth into that within the veil; whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus,
made an High Priest forever, after the Order of Melchesedec.
Heb. 6:19,20.
Having then a great High Priest, who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the
Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we have not an High Priest that
cannot be touched by the feelings of our infirmities; but one that hath been in all points
tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Let us, therefore, draw near with boldness
unto the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy, and may find grace to help us in time
of need.
Heb. 4:14-16 R.V.
How much more reasonable and scriptural to believe that the heavenly veil was rent at
the death of Christ so that the mercy seat, or throne of grace, could be seen at the same
time with the altar and candlestick; than to move the throne of God from its foundation,
the law, and place it for 1800 years in the first apartment, with Christ as High Priest
ministering in the presence of his Father, with the veil behind them both, and separating
them from the law and mercy seat, the only place where the gospel has its center; and
this, too, in the face of the fact that the type calls for a ministry "before the
veil," while God is enthroned "within the veil" above the mercy seat and
the broken law; and still more, in opposition to the plain statement that Christ has
entered "within the veil" and "is set down on the right hand of the throne
of the Majesty in the heavens."
CHAPTER III.
"WITHIN
THE VEIL"
That Christ entered the holy of holies at his ascension seems clearly proved from the
Epistle to the Hebrews.
In Heb. 6:19,20, we have the following statement concerning Christ:
Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which
entereth into that within the veil; whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus,
made an High Priest forever after the order of Melchisedec.
This Scripture says plainly that at the time the Hebrew letter was written, Christ had
entered "within the veil." Now, to which of the two apartments does this
term refer? It will be noticed that the apostle refers to this place "within
the veil" as if it were a place perfectly familiar to the readers. He does not
stop to define it, but passes on, taking it for granted that the term is familiar to them;
just as Matthew in his gospel refers to "the Sabbath" in Chap. 12:1. He
does not stop to define which day is "the Sabbath," although there were other
days in the Jewish system to which the term "Sabbath" was applied; he takes it
for granted that when he uses the term "the Sabbath day," all will understand
from their previous knowledge of the Old Testament that he is referring to the seventh
day. Again, in the second chapter of Acts, the writer speaks of the "Day of
Pentecost"; he does not stop to explain what day that is, but assumes that the
reader, from his knowledge of the Old Testament, will know which day the "Day of
Pentecost" is.
The only Scripture in all the Bible that is used to prove that the term "within the
veil" refers to the first apartment, or within the curtain which formed the door of
the tabernacle, is the Scripture found in Heb. 9:3. Paul, here, in describing the
Mosaic temple says:
And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the holiest of all.
"There," said my teachers, "that proves that the first curtain was a
veil." Yes, it does; but it also proves that the first curtain was the first
veil. It will not do to demand that the logic of Paul's statement makes the first
curtain "a veil," and then shrink from accepting the full result of that same
logic which makes it the first veil. Here, therefore, we have the Apostle Paul
calling the second curtain the "second veil" and the first curtain the
"first veil." Now, if the Scripture in Heb. 6:19 had said that Christ had
entered the "first veil," then the question would be settled; but he simply says
that Christ has entered "within the veil." Now, inasmuch as he uses the
term without explaining it, taking it for granted that his readers understand to what
place he refers, the all-important question arises: To which place within the first veil,
or within the second veil-would the reader understand the term "within the veil"
to apply? If the term "within the veil" applies to the first apartment,
then we would expect that it had been thus applied so universally in the Old Testament
Scriptures, that the reader would not hesitate in applying it to the first
apartment. But when I came to study the matter carefully I found that the term
"within the veil," in the Old Testament never applied to the place within the
door of the tabernacle, or the first apartment, but always to the holy of holies, within
the veil which separated the holy from the most holy. I found that the Hebrew
Scriptures never call the curtain at the door of the tabernacle "a veil," much
less "the veil." On the other hand, the term "veil" is
applied to the curtain separating the holy from the most holy; and the term "within
the veil" applies only to the holy of holies.
The Veil in the Hebrew --
The Book of Exodus |
For the benefit of the reader, every passage in the Hebrew Scriptures which mentions
"the veil" is here quoted. The Hebrew term for "veil," when
referring to the sanctuary is Pah-roh-cheth. It occurs just twenty-five
times. In every case it is applied to the "second veil," or the curtain
between the holy and the most holy. The reader is also asked to note carefully that
the name which the Scriptures give to the first curtain all through the Old Testament is
"door of the tabernacle," with its modifications.
And thou shalt make [1] a veil of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and
fine-twisted linen of cunning work; with cherubims shall it be made: And thou shalt
put the mercy seat upon the ark wood overlaid with gold; their hooks shall be of gold,
upon the four sockets of silver. And thou shalt hang up [2]
the veil under the taches, that thou mayest bring in thither within [3] the veil the ark of the testimony; and [4] the veil shall divide unto you between the holy
and the most holy. And thou shalt put the mercy seat upon the ark of the testimony
in the most holy place. And thou shalt set the table without [5]
the veil, and the candlestick over against the table on the side of the tabernacle
toward the south: and thou shalt put the table on the north side.
And thou shalt make an hanging for the door of the tent, of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and
fine-twined linen, wrought with needlework.
Ex.
26:31-36.
Note how the first curtain is called in verse 36 "the door of the tent," in
contrast to the "veil."
And thou shalt command the children of Israel, that they bring thee pure oil
olive beaten for the light, to cause the lamp to burn always. In the tabernacle of
the congregation without [6] the veil, which
is before the testimony.
Ex.
27:20,21.
And thou shalt make an altar to burn incense upon: of shittim wood shalt thou
make it.... And thou shalt put it before [7]
the veil that is by the ark of the testimony, before the mercy seat that is over
the testimony, where I will meet with thee.
Ex.
30:1,6.
Note again how the Lord calls the first curtain the "door of the tabernacle,"
in the forty-second verse of the previous chapter, in contrast to the term
"veil," which is again applied to the second curtain.
The ark, and the staves thereof, with the mercy seat, and [8]
the veil of the covering.... And the incense altar, and his staves, and the
anointing oil, and the sweet incense, and the hanging for the door
at the entering of the tabernacle.
Ex.
35:12,15.
Again, the second curtain is called "the veil of the covering" while the
curtain at he door of the tabernacle is called "the hanging for the door at the
entering in of the tabernacle."
And he made [9] a veil of blue, and
purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen: with cherubims made he it of cunning
work.... And he made an hanging for the tabernacle door
of blue and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen, of needlework.
Ex.
36:35,37.
The reader is asked to notice once more that the Lord calls the curtain between the
holy and the most holy, "a veil," and in distinction, calls the first curtain
"a hanging for the tabernacle door;"
And of the hundred talents of silver were cast the sockets the sanctuary, and
the sockets of [10] the veil; an hundred
sockets of the hundred talents, a talent for a socket.... And therewith he made the
sockets to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.
Ex.
38:27,30.
The first curtain is called "the door of the tabernacle," here as elsewhere,
in contrast to "the veil."
And the covering of ram's skins dyed red, and the covering of badger's skins,
and [11] the veil of the covering....
And the golden altar, and the annointing oil, and the sweet incense, and the hanging for the tabernacle door.
Ex.
39:34,38.
Once more the curtain at the door of the tabernacle is called "the hanging for the
tabernacle door," in contrast to "the veil".
And thou shalt put therein the ark of the testimony and cover the ark with [12] the veil.... And thou shalt set the altar
of gold for the incense before the ark of the testimony, and put the
hanging of the door to the tabernacle.
Ex.
45:3,5.
Again the Lord carefully distinguishes the two curtains, calling the first curtain
"the door."
And he brought the ark into the tab- ernacle, and set up [13]
the veil of the covering, and covered the ark of the testimony; and as the Lord
commanded Moses.
And he put the table in the tent of the congregation, upon the side of the
tabernacle northward, without [14] the veil.
And he put the golden altar in the tent of the congregation before [15] the veil.
And he set up the hanging of the door of the tabernacle.
Ex.
40:21,22,26,28.
The reader must by this time be deeply impressed with the careful distinction which the
Lord universally makes in discriminating between the two curtains. Here again the
curtain between the holy and the most holy is three times called "the veil"; and
in contrast to this, the first curtain is called "the hanging at the door of the
tabernacle."
We have now examined fifteen out of the twenty-five instances where "the
veil" is referred to in the Old Testament. Every one of these fifteen instances
refers unmistakably to the curtain separating the holy from the most holy. The term
"the veil" thus far is the name which the Holy Spirit gives to the second
curtain, and to that curtain only; while "the door of the tabernacle" is the
name which the same Spirit gives to the first curtain.
The Veil in the
Levitical Law |
We are now about to pass to the Book of Leviticus. In this book we have the law of
God regulating the sacrificial system. The terms used in the book are legal
terms. They must be definite, for they are for the information of the priests who
were to offer the sacrifices. The names given by this Levitical law to the two
curtains are as rigid and binding as is the name "Sabbath," as applied by the
ten commandments to the seventh day. It will not be denied for a moment that the
first curtain, or the curtain at the door of the tabernacle was a veil, both as to its
construction and its use; but the question we are now examining is -- does the Lord
apply the term "within the veil" so universally to the space within the first
curtain that when one reads in Heb. 6:19 that Christ has entered "within the
veil," he will have no hesitation in applying it to the first apartment?
Thus far in our study the terms "the veil" and "within the veil"
are applied rigidly to the second curtain, and the holy of holies; and now that we have
come to the book that gives the legal names to the sanctuary and its offerings, let us see
what names are given to these two curtains by the Levitical law.
In Lev. 1:5 we read, concerning the burnt offerings:
And he shall kill the bullock before the Lord, and the priests, Aaron's sons,
shall bring the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar, that is by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.
Here, the Levitical law names the first curtain, not "the veil," but the
"door of the tabernacle of the congregation."
And the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle the blood seven
times before the Lord, before [16] the veil of
the sanctuary. And the priest shall pour all the blood of the bullock at the bottom
of the altar of burnt offering, which is at the door of the
tabernacle of the congregation.
Lev.
4:6,7.
Here, the Levitical law gives the legal name of "veil of the sanctuary" to
the curtain between the holy and the most holy; and the legal name of "door of the
tabernacle" to the first curtain.
And the priest shall dip his finger in some of the blood, and sprinkle it seven
times before the Lord, even before [17] the veil.
And he shall put some of the blood upon the horns of the altar which is before the Lord,
that is in the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall pour out all the blood at the
bottom of the altar of the burnt offering, which is at the door of
the tabernacle of the congregation.
Lev.
4:17,18.
Here again, the Lord designates the curtain between the two apartments as "the
veil," and the first curtain as "the door of the tabernacle."
And the Lord said unto Moses, Speak unto Aaron, thy brother, that he come not at
all times into the holy place, within [18] the veil
before the mercy seat, which is upon the ark; that he die not: for I will appear in the
cloud upon the mercy seat.
And he shall take the two goats, and present them before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.
And he shall take a censer full of burning coals of fire from off the altar
before the Lord, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring it within [19] the veil.
Then shall he kill the goat of the sin offering, that is for the people, and
bring his blood within [20] the veil.
Lev.
16:2,7,12,13.
Here, as always, the Levitical law makes a rigid distinction between the two curtains,
calling the one separating the two apartments "the veil," and the first one
"the door of the tabernacle."
Only he shall not go in unto [21] the veil,
nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish.
Lev.
21:23.
Command the children of Israel that they bring unto thee pure oil olive beaten for the
light, to cause the lamps to burn continually.
Without [22] the veil of the
testimony, in the tabernacle of the congregation, shall Aaron order it from the evening
unto the morning before the Lord continually: it shall be a statute forever in your
generations.
Lev.
24:2,3.
And when the camp setteth forward, Aaron shall come, and his sons, and they
shall take down [23] the covering veil, and
cover the ark of the testimony with it.
And they shall bear the curtains of the tabernacle, and the tabernacle of the
congregation, his covering, and the covering of the badgers' skins that is above it, and the hanging for the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.
Num.
4:5,25.
Again we have the two curtains carefully distinguished.
Therefore thou and thy sons with thee shall keep your priest's office for
everything of the altar, and within [24] the veil.
Num.
18:7.
And he made [25] the veil of blue, and purple, and
crimson, and fine linen, and wrought cherubims thereon.
2
Chr. 3:14.
These are the twenty-five instances in the Hebrew Scriptures where the term
"veil" appears, and the reader must recognize that the Lord invariably applies
the term to the curtain separating the holy from the most holy. Never has He called
the first curtain "the veil" in the Hebrew Scriptures. Bear in mind, it is
not denied that the first curtain was a veil, both as to its construction and use; but the
Lord was careful, in naming the two curtains, to give the first one the name of "the
door of the tabernacle," and the second one the name of "the veil."
The Veil in the
Septuagint |
An effort has been made to weaken the force of this rigid distinction which the Hebrew
Scriptures make between the two curtains, by referring to the Septuagint, which as all my
brethren know, is a translation of the Old Testament from the Hebrew into the Greek.
It is claimed that in the Septuagint the first curtain is sometimes called a veil.
This is true. And that the first curtain was a veil, both as to construction and use
has never been denied. But I have contended that God had so clearly distinguished
between the two curtains that when he uses the term "within the veil" in the
book of Hebrews, the reader is compelled to apply it to the holy of holies in the heavenly
sanctuary. Never in the Septuagint is the first curtain called a veil except in the
directions for the making and moving of the tabernacle and then only when the connection
plainly shows to which curtain it is applied. To illustrate: In Ex 28:16 we have
"the veil of the gate of the court" and in Ex. 37:5 we have "the veil of
the door of the tabernacle." Whenever the term veil appears in the Septuagint
without qualification it refers to the veil separating the holy from the most holy.
Never in the Septuagint is the first curtain called a veil in the book of Leviticus,
which contains the law governing the sacrificial system.
Never in the Septuagint is the term "within the veil" applied to any other
than the holy of holies. Lev. 16:3,12,15.
Never in the Septuagint are the terms "before the veil" and "without the
veil" applied to any other than the first apartment. Lev. 24:3.
In the Septuagint the first curtain is referred to twenty-two times in the hook of
Leviticus, and every time it is called the door of the tabernacle, in distinction from the
second curtain which in every instance (seven times) is referred to as the veil in such
expressions as "the veil," "the veil of the sanctuary," "within
the veil" and "outside the veil."
And now let us examine every instance where the term "within the veil" is used,
and see how invariably it is applied to the most holy place.
The first use of the term is found in Ex. 26:33:
And thou shalt hang up the veil under the taches, that thou mayest bring in
thither within the veil the ark of the testimony; and the
veil shall divide unto you between the holy place and the most holy.
The next three instances are found in Lev. 16:2,12,15, which verses read as follows:
And the Lord said unto Moses, Speak unto Aaron, thy brother, that he come not at
all times into the holy place within the veil before the
mercy seat, which is upon the ark; that he die not: for I will appear in the cloud upon
the mercy seat... And he shall take a censer full of burning coals from off the
altar before the Lord, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring it within the veil... Then, shall he kill the goat of the sin
offering, that is for the people, and bring his blood within the
veil, and do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle
it upon the mercy seat.
The next and last instance of its use in the Old Testament is found in Num. 18:7,
Therefore thou and thy sons with thee shall keep your priest's office for
everything of the altar, and within the veil.
Thus again it is made plain that the term "within the veil," in the mind of
the student of the Hebrew Scriptures, meant in the holy of holies, and not in the first
apartment.
It must be evident to the reader that if the term "within the veil" refers to
the first apartment instead of the second then the terms "without the veil" and
"before the veil" would necessarily mean outside the first apartment, or outside
the door of the tabernacle, where the altar of burnt offering was located. And now
let us read all the references that use the terms in the Hebrew Scriptures, and see that
they always refer to the place before the veil of the sanctuary, and not before the door
of the tabernacle.
The first is in Ex. 26:35.
And thou shalt set the table without the veil, and
the candlestick over against the table on the side of the tabernacle toward the south; and
thou shalt put the table on the north side.
The next use of the term is in Ex. 27:20, 21
And thou shalt command the children of Israel that they bring thee pure oil
olive beaten for the light, to cause the lamp to burn always in the tabernacle of the
congregation, without the veil, which is before the
testimony.
The next instance is found in connection with the erection of the sanctuary. Ex.
40:22,26.
And he put the table in the tent of the congrega- tion, upon the north side of
the tabernacle without the veil and he put the golden altar in the tent of the
congregation before the veil.
The next two occurrences of the term are found in Lev. 4:6,17.
And the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle of the blood
seven times before the Lord, before the veil.
And the priest shall dip his finger in some of the blood, and sprinkle it seven
times before the Lord, even before the veil.
The next and last instance is found in Lev. 24:1-3:
And the Lord spake unto Moses saying, Command the children of Israel, that they
bring unto thee pure oil olive beaten for the light, to cause the lamps to burn
continually without the veil, of the testimony, in the
tabernacle of the congregation.
Thus it is again made plain that the term "within the veil" must apply to the
second apartment, or holy of holies, inasmuch as every time the terms "without the
veil" or "before the veil" are used, they invariably apply to the holy
place, or first apartment, and not outside the sanctuary, as it would of necessity be, if
the term "within the veil" applied to the first apartment, as the denomination
teaches.
Reader, it is for believing that "without the veil" and "before the
veil" always refers to the first apartment of the sanctuary, and the term
"within the veil" always refers to the second apartment, that I have been cast
out of the church and declared an enemy of God and man. But I appeal to your honest
convictions, have I a "thus saith the Lord" for my belief or have I not?
The Veil of the New
Testament |
Passing from the Old Testament into the New, we find the Holy Spirit, still referring to
the curtain between the holy and the most holy as "the veil." The Greek
word translated "veil" is katapetasma, and it appears six times in the
New Testament. The first reference is in Matt. 27:50-52,
And Jesus when he had cried with a loud voice, yielded up the Ghost; and behold,
the veil of the temple was rent in twain from top to the
bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; and the graves were opened, and many
bodies of the saints which slept arose.
The next instance of the use of the term "veil" in the New Testament, as
applied to the sanctuary, appears in Mark 15:37,38.
And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the Ghost: And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the
bottom.
The third instance occurs in Luke 23:44,45,
And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth
until the ninth hour. And the sun was darkened, and the veil
of the temple was rent in the midst.
The reader will notice that the Holy Spirit in all these three instances calls the veil
between the holy and the most holy places "the veil of the temple."
An effort is made to break the overwhelming force of this argument by saying that the
reason why the Spirit of God was not more accurate, and did not say "second
veil," was because there was only one veil in the temple at the time of Christ's
crucifixion; but this is not borne out by the facts. Conybeare & Howson's Life
and Epistles of St. Paul, p. 581, states that in the temple of Herod there was a veil
at the door of the first apartment as well as a veil between the holy and the most
holy. Josephus, in his Antiquities of the Jews, book XV, chapter 11, par.
3, speaks of the veils that adorned the doors of the temple. This objection loses
its force also when we consider that at the time when there were two curtains, only one of
them, and that one between the holy and the most holy, was called "the veil of the
sanctuary."
And the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle of the blood
seven times before the Lord, before the veil of the sanctuary.
Lev.
4,6,7.
The Holy Spirit did not call the veil between the holy and the most holy "the veil
of the temple" because there was but one veil, but because that was one name of the
curtain separating the holy from the most holy.
There are but three more instances where this Greek word appears in the New Testament,
and all of these three instances are to be found in the book of Hebrews. And can we
suppose for a moment that the Holy Spirit in the hook of Hebrews would contradict the
whole testimony of the Old Testament Scriptures, and its own previous testimony in the
New, with this overwhelming evidence, both from the Hebrew Scriptures and the New
Testament, that the term "veil" when used without qualification applies
invariably to the curtain between the holy and the most holy, and the term "within
the veil" applies just as invariably to the most holy place, let us now read again
the Scripture in Heb. 6:19:
Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which
entereth into that within the veil, whither our forerunner is
for us entered, even Jesus, made an High Priest forever after the order of Melchisedec.
I appeal again to the reader: How can I, in the face the testimony of Scripture, teach
that this term refers to the FIRST APARTMENT?
The next reference is in Heb. 9:3,
And after the second veil, the taber- nacle, which
is called the holiest of all.
Here, as before stated, we have the Lord calling the second curtain the "second
veil," and by implication calling the first curtain "the first veil."
And now from our study of the Old and New Testaments, which one of these veils does the
Lord refer to when He uses the term "within the veil"? Unquestionably, the
second.
An illustration will help to impress this thought.
A builder in a cold climate often has two doors at the entrance of his home. The
first one is called "the storm door," and the second one "the
door." To distinguish them, he writes these names with chalk upon the
doors. He afterwards speaks of "the door" as "the second door,"
which would make the storm door the "first door." Now, if be tells his
painter to go and paint "the door," which one of the doors would the painter
paint? Surely not the storm door, for the storm door is not named "the
door." It is the second door that is called "the door." So it
is with these two curtains. God calls the first curtain "the door of the
tabernacle," and the second curtain "the veil"; but in one instance only he
refers to "the veil" as "the second veil," and by implication calls
the first curtain the "first veil." Then when in the same epistle he
speaks of "the veil," surely he cannot possibly be referring to the first
curtain, because that is not the name of the first curtain, but the name of the second.
The last reference is found in Heb. 10:19,20. After proving that the Lord had, at
the time of Paul's writing, offered the offering which was typified by the offering made
by the high priest every year at the mercy seat, within the holy of holies, and after
declaring that there is "no more offering for sin," the apostle continues,
Having, therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of
Jesus, by a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us through the veil, that is
to say, his flesh.
The high priest of the Mosaic sanctuary made his yearly offering, (which typified the
offering of Christ), within the veil, at the mercy seat, and since Christ has made the one
offering for sin, which that offering typified, it follows, inevitably, that Christ made
that offering upon the mercy seat, "within the veil," or in the most holy
place. How very fitting, then, it is for the apostle to encourage us to follow our
great High Priest "within the veil."
And now I appeal to the reader: When the Holy Spirit in Heb. 6:19 tells us that Christ,
our forerunner, has entered "within the veil," which department am I to
understand is referred to by this term? Let me again call attention to the fact that
the term "within the veil" is used in Heb. 6:19 without qualification