ijgospel

1. What clear didactic statements of the Bible teach an investigative judgment long before the Second Coming?
See, The Silencing of Satan: The Gospel of the Investigative Judgment, Chapters 1, 3, 6, 11.

2. What connections exists between the rituals of the day of atonement (Leviticus 16) and the prophecy of Daniel
8:14?
See, The Silencing of Satan: The Gospel of the Investigative Judgment, Chapter 7

3. How can Seventh-day Adventist believe that the sins of the saints are the focus of Daniel 8:14–isn't this an illogical
jump from one subject (the atrocities of the little horn against the saints) to a completely different subject?
See, The Silencing of Satan: The Gospel of the Investigative Judgment, Chapter 8; Clifford Goldstein, Graffiti in the
Holy of Holies, pp. 63 - 66

4. How can a Christian have assurance of eternal life if there must be an investigative judgment of their fitness for
heaven?
See, The Silencing of Satan: The Gospel of the Investigative Judgment, Chapters 2,4,5

5. Is there good reason to accept the day for a year principle?
Yes, see Williams Shea, Selected Studies on Prophetic Interpretation, Revised ed., Daniel and Revelation Committee
Series, vol. 1, pp. 67 - 110; Clifford Goldstein, Graffiti in the Holy of Holies, pp. 104 - 113

6. Does blood defile and cleanse? Did the sins of the saints defile the earthly sanctuary?
This matter is a question of the Adventist view that the blood produced by sacrifices offered by the people defiled the
earthly sanctuary. There are various matters involved in this challenge that I will not address here. It seems to me
that there is one fundamental issue which should be our focus: Did the earthly sanctuary need to be cleansed? If so,
a need for cleansing the heavenly sanctuary would be possible. And, of course, we know that Hebrews 9:23 speaks
of such a cleansing.

But many believe that the book of Hebrews teaches that this cleansing happened in AD 31. See next question for
further discussion of this point. See, Frank Holbrook, The Atoning Priesthood of Jesus Christ, pp. 101 - 105

7. Does the book of Hebrews make a latter day fulfillment of the day of atonement rituals impossible?
Desmond Ford argues that Hebrews sets the time for the fulfillment of the day of atonement in AD 31, but he then
weakens this position with his conclusion that the day of atonement applies to both AD 31 and to the last days (D.
Ford, Daniel 8:14: The Day of Atonement and the Investigative Judgment, pp. 67-69).
The fact is that the Adventist's latter-day application of the day of atonement has abundant support. For example,
Ford admits that there is ample evidence in Revelation that the day of atonement addresses the last days (D. Ford,
Op. cit., p. 3). Since we agree that the day of atonement has latter day application, the only thing left to discuss is
which aspects of the day of atonement rituals still apply. Is there a latter-day cleansing or righting? Yes.
Hebrews uses Old Testament texts in a way that is best understood as, what I would call, "inspired
accommodation." This means that the Old Testament passages are not quoted as proof. Instead they are adapted,
perhaps even reinterpreted (e.g., Heb 1:5,8,9). Here the inspired author of Hebrews is not interpreting (telling us the
meaning of) an Old Testament passage. Paul is not implying, in his use of these passages, that their meaning or
fulfillment have been exhausted. We should remember this as we read the reference to cleansing in Hebrews 9:23.
Indeed, the day of atonement cleansing rituals were not exhausted of their meaning in AD 31; for, Daniel 12:10 &
Malachi 3:2,3 indicate a last-day cleansing of the saints and Daniel 8:14 indicates a last-day cleansing or righting of
God's sanctuary.

8. Is the date 457 B.C. well established?
Yes. See, Clifford Goldstein, Graffiti in the Holy of Holies, pp. 98-103; Siegfried Horn and Lynn Wood, The Chronology
of Ezra 7

9. Is the 457 BC decree of Ezra 7 the fulfillment of the prediction of Daniel 9 concerning the rebuilding of Jerusalem?
Yes. See The Silencing of Satan: The Gospel of the Investigative Judgment, Chapter 11

10. Do we know the dates for Jesus's birth, baptism, and death?
Yes. See, Clifford Goldstein, Graffiti in the Holy of Holies, pp. 98 - 103; C. Mervin Maxwell, God Cares, Vol. One, pp.
215-219,226,227

11. Is Atiochus Epiphanes IV the fulfillment of the little horn of Daniel 8?
No. See Williams Shea, Selected Studies on Prophetic Interpretation, Revised ed., Daniel and Revelation Committee
Series, vol. 1, pp. 31 - 66; Clifford Goldstein, Graffiti in the Holy of Holies, pp. 21-44. Nowhere does Des Ford (and
those that argue against our Adventist pioneers understanding of Daniel 8:14) have a weaker case than on this
point. It seems that the strength of Ford's argument rests on the fact that Jews and early Christians--who obviously
knew nothing of the papacy--believed Atiochus best fulfilled the prophecy of Dan 8:14. It does not seem to occur to
Ford (et al) that these same people might have changed their interpretation if they lived to see the papal persecutions
of the saints, its attacks on God's sanctuary, and its efforts to change God's times and laws.

12. Is the judgment of Daniel 7, Daniel 8, and Revelation 14:7 only a judgment upon the wicked and not an
announcement of a judgment of the saints?
The judgment of the church is pictured in each. See The Silencing of Satan: The Gospel of the Investigative
Judgment, Chapter 7

13. Was October 22, 1844 the tenth day of the seventh Hebrew month?
Yes. See Williams Shea, Selected Studies on Prophetic Interpretation, Revised ed., Daniel and Revelation Committee
Series, vol. 1, pp. 165-171

14. What answers do we have to Raymond Cottrell's Interpretation of Daniel?
The late Raymond Cottrell's thoughts on Daniel have not been widely circulated in the Adventist church. However,
his concerns and doubts about the Adventist position on the prophecies of Daniel, in particular Daniel 8:14, have
circulate widely enough to have a significant effect on our discussion of the investigative judgment.

It is no doubt that Elder Cottrell should be respected for his accomplishments in mastering the Hebrew language. It
is a fact that his understanding of the Hebrew text of Daniel led him to conclusions that did not support the doctrine
of the investigative judgment.

How shall we address his concerns?
1. While we do not want to simply dismiss brother's Cottrell's expertise, it must be admitted that It is beyond the
ability of most lay members to properly judge his conclusions. Simply put, few read and understand Hebrew. We are
on dangerous ground if we leave it to one person to tell us what the Bible means. "Knowing this first, that no
prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation" 2 Pet 1:20. Those who make Dr. Cottrell the final word on
Daniel and the Adventist doctrine of the investigative judgment are making him the final word--their private irrefutable
interpreter. I honestly doubt that he would have wanted people to elevate him to the level of infallible interpreter of
Scripture. Therefore, our first answer to Dr. Cottrell's concerns is that 99% of those who read his writings or listen to
recordings of his presentations cannot know for certain that he is right.
2. The second response to Dr. Cottrell is this: In The Silencing of Satan: The Gospel of the Investigative Judgment
there is sufficient evidence to show that the doctrine of the investigative judgment is biblically sound. There is also in
this book powerful evidence that shows that the pioneers were correct in their understanding that there was a
connection between the prophecy of Daniel 8 and the day of atonement rituals of Leviticus 16.

15. What answer do we have to objections to the use of the word "cleanse", rather than "make right", in the King
James Version of Daniel 8:14?
We may rightly wonder if the translators of the King James Version, or at least those who prepared the manuscripts
that it was taken from, felt there was a connection between the prophecy of Daniel 8 and day of atonement rituals of
Leviticus 16. For, they chose to use the word "cleanse" instead of the term "justify," or "make right" in rendering
Daniel 8:14. Perhaps they understood that making the sanctuary right was accomplished in its cleansing on the day
of atonement. If these able scholars did make this connection, we have a third reason to be cautious in accepting a
private interpretation of Daniel (See answers to Cottrell).

16. Has the investigative judgment been presented in a legalistic way?
Yes, it is true that the presentation of the investigative judgment by some has been mixed with legalism as well as a
distorted view of Christian perfection (Matt 5:48; Heb 12:14). The investigative judgment of the living has been
presented as an unknown time when God checks to see if all sins are confessed, forsaken, and overcome. The idea
has been given that if, at the moment one's name comes up before the court, that person is in anyway transgressing
the eternal verdict goes against them. This misguided presentation has left Adventists feeling hopelessly
discouraged and lost.
It is no wonder that some Adventist pastors and lay members have tended to avoid or even oppose this doctrine
over the decades. Think of the implications of this legalism: The legalistic presentation says, God is going to come to
your name at a time when you think not. An occasional misdeed could be deadly. Misbehavior at that moment when
your name comes up will cause you to be lost. If on the other hand, you are doing good when heaven takes up your
case, you will judged fit for eternity. So, the only safe course is to be doing only good. There is certainly no time for
growth in such an understanding of the investigative judgment. Sanctification is not the work of a life time. We must
overcome TODAY if we expect to be saved in such a judgment. We must have instant perfection TODAY, or we have
no assurance of eternal life. This makes it too hard to be saved.
While it is true that some have presented the investigative judgment this way, this is not the biblical doctrine of the
judgment. Thus, this legalistic view has never been the official doctrine of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. In The
Silencing of Satan: The Gospel of the Investigative Judgment, Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, and 11, you will find a far more
accurate picture of the investigative judgment and of the Gospel. The investigative judgment is Christ engaged in a
work of defending and delivering His beloved children. In The Silencing of Satan: The Gospel of the Investigative
Judgment you will see that God has not made it too hard to be saved.

17. Jesus and the writers of the New Testament indicate that the Second Coming, and therefore the judgment,
should have occurred in the First Century. Doesn't this mean that a judgment beginning in 1844 would be out of the
question?
No. This is shown:
1. By the fact that Jesus anticipated such a delay (Matt 24:48; 25:5 (Gr., chronizo is used in both passages),
2. By Jesus', and other's instruction in the New Testament, that shows that during the whole Christian era believers
are investigated. See, The Silencing of Satan: The Gospel of the Investigative Judgment, Chapter 1, 2, and 6, and
3. By the history of Bible prophecy, which anticipates such timing for the judgment to begin. See, The Silencing of
Satan: The Gospel of the Investigative Judgment, Chapter 11

18* Some have said that the investigative judgment happens in an instant just before the Second Coming. Can that
be true? For an answer to this question click here.

19. Does the investigative judgment involve an illogical time consuming consideration of the believer?

Some think that it is illogical because it would take too long to judge each person. Of course, this may be mistaken
by some as a way to dismiss the investigative judgment doctrine. Kevin Ferris, while not dismissing the investigative
judgment per se, writes in an online edition of Adventist Review:

"If each of the 6 billion inhabitants of today's world were granted the same privilege, the judgment would take more
than a million years from start to finish! Proportionately speaking, over the years since 1844, you would have only
one second or less! Count 'one . . .'--and it's over!

"Of course this is not a problem to God, who can bring any dimension to time He requires. But if we insist on
applying human understandings to heavenly affairs, then we must follow our assumptions to their logical end."

Kevin misses the importance of his own point when he writes "Of course this is not a problem to God, who can bring
any dimension to time He requires." Kevin, in that one sentence, undoes all he points out as being a problem for the
investigative judgment doctrine as conceived by Adventist pioneers. God is, if he chooses to be, above and outside
of our understanding of time. To Him a thousand years may seem as a day and a day may seem as the passing of a
thousand years. If God so desired, I suppose He could carry on our judgment while making time as we know it stand
still. And, therefore, following our understanding of God's power to its logical ends, leads us to conclude that Kevin
is partially correct and mostly wrong--wrong that time is a problem with the investigative judgment, right in solving
his own problem. Let us agree with Kevin then, we should not "insist on applying human understandings to
heavenly affairs." Let an understanding of Jesus and the study of the Word of God be our source of understanding.

20. Seventh-day Adventists have interpreted the day of atonement ritual concerning the goat for Azazel as being a
representative of Satan. Our fellow Christians question how Azazel/scapegoat could be Satan. They say, You are
making Satan your savior. And we say, Heaven forbid! Click here for seven reasons why it is reasonable to believe
that the goat for Azazel is Satan.