Larger font
Smaller font
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font


    The reader will now understand why we have dwelt so lengthily upon the history of the worldly sanctuary. It is because Paul, in plain and explicit language, declares that that building erected by Moses at the command of God, and which was perpetuated in the temples built by Solomon, Zerubbabel, and Herod, was the sanctuary of the first covenant; and it was important to see how prominent a place that held in the former dispensation. The word sanctuary occurs in the Old Testament one hundred and forty-two times, and in almost every instance refers to this building. It was no insignificant object, it was no trifle in the divine economy of that age. It is everywhere held before us as the sanctuary, the holy place, the sacred place, the dwelling-place of the Most High among the children of men. And Paul presents the complement to all these declarations when he declares so clearly that this was the sanctuary of the first covenant.STTHD 178.1

    We desire the reader to appreciate the full value which this statement possesses in this investigation. From this there is no appeal. Here all believers in the Bible must occupy common ground. Here, for the space of fifteen hundred years, we are all brought together on this subject. From Moses to Christ, this object, and no other, was the sanctuary of the Bible.STTHD 178.2

    We have followed this to the close of its history. In A.D.70 it disappeared forever from the face of the earth. Has there been no sanctuary since that time? Or has something else taken the place of that sanctuary? If this latter be the fact, we ask what that something else may be.STTHD 179.1

    We have seen that only 490 years of the 2300 belonged to the Jews and Jerusalem. When that period ended, the services of the sanctuary of that people had come to an end. But yet 1810 years remained, bringing us down even to 1844. And it had been announced through the prophet that then the sanctuary should be cleansed. What sanctuary? and where? No sanctuary on the earth; for since A.D.70 there has been none here. But a sanctuary cannot be cleansed that does not exist. There must therefore be a sanctuary somewhere, and that date must bring us to its cleansing, or the word of God prove incorrect.STTHD 179.2

    Paul says that the sanctuary of Moses was the sanctuary of the first covenant. It was, as we have seen, one of the chief features of that covenant. But that covenant has given place to the new. Jeremiah 31:31; Hebrews 8:10-12. Under this new covenant we are now living; for it was confirmed by the Messiah, the Prince, during the last week of the seventy, or the last seven years of the 490, by himself in person for the first half of the week, three years and a half to A.D.31, and through his apostles during the remainder of that period, to A.D.34. Hebrews 2:3. The great features of that first covenant find their counterpart in the present. The sanctuary of that covenant must find its counterpart here. And the Bible nowhere recognizes anything as the sanctuary of God, except the sanctuary, or sanctuaries, connected with these two covenants. The new covenant therefore has a sanctuary, as well as the old.STTHD 180.1

    This is proved directly by the words of Paul in the text in question, Hebrews 9:1: “Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.” Paul is showing the relation which the two covenants sustain to each other; and the word, also, shows that those things which he mentions pertained to both. One had ordinances of divine service; the other also has them. One had a sanctuary; the other also has a sanctuary.STTHD 180.2

    The great question to which we have now come, and in which all the controversy is involved, is then simply this:—STTHD 181.1

    What is the sanctuary of the new covenant?STTHD 181.2

    The sanctuary of the old covenant must bear the same relation to the sanctuary of the new covenant, which the old covenant itself bears to the new. And on this point we suppose there is no controversy. All agree that they stand as type and antitype. The first was the type and shadow; this is the antitype and substance. The sanctuary of that dispensation was the type; the sanctuary of this is the antitype. But the sanctuary of that dispensation was the tabernacle of Moses. Of what, then, was the tabernacle of Moses a type, figure, or shadow?STTHD 181.3

    The answer to this question is intimated in various scriptures to which we now call the attention of the reader. To Moses the Lord said: “Let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them. According to all that I show thee, after the pattern of the tabernacle, and the pattern of all the instruments thereof, even so shall ye make it.” Exodus 25:8, 9. “And look that thou make them after their pattern, which was showed thee in the mount.” Verse 40. “And thou shalt rear up the tabernacle according to the fashion thereof which was showed thee in the mount.” Exodus 26:30. “As it was showed thee in the mount, so shall they make it.” Exodus 27:8. “Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as He had appointed, speaking unto Moses, that he should make it according to the fashion that he had seen.” Acts 7:44. “While as the first tabernacle was yet standing, which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices.” Hebrews 9:8, 9. “For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true.” Verse 24.STTHD 181.4

    These texts afford no material for an argument and conclusion. They make a plain, positive assertion, which, if we believe their testimony, we must admit. They declare that the tabernacle built by Moses, the sanctuary of the first covenant, was not an original structure; it was made after a pattern; it was simply a model or figure of something else, given for the time being to his people; and that from which it was modeled or fashioned, is declared to be the true sanctuary; and this true sanctuary must be the sanctuary of the new covenant; for God recognizes in connection with his work only these two: the true, and the figure or model which was made from it. The figure was the tabernacle of Moses. What is the true?STTHD 182.1

    THE EARTH NOT THE SANCTUARY.— Having seen that the new covenant must have a sanctuary corresponding to that of the old, and that there must be something now recognized by the Bible as the sanctuary, the next step in the inquiry is to try to ascertain what this is. And here we are met by a variety of conflicting views which demand examination.STTHD 183.1

    It is claimed by some that this earth is now the sanctuary.STTHD 183.2

    By others, that it takes earth and Heaven together to constitute the sanctuary; the earth being the first apartment, and all Heaven the second.STTHD 183.3

    By a third class it is claimed that the land of Canaan is now the sanctuary.STTHD 183.4

    And a fourth class take the word in a more figurative sense, and apply it to the church.STTHD 183.5

    Is the earth the sanctuary? We reply, No; and the reasons for this answer are at hand.STTHD 183.6

    1. Definition of the word. According to Webster, Walker, Cruden, and the Bible, the term sanctuary is defined to mean, “A holy place, a sacred place, a dwelling-place for the Most High.” Is the earth such a place? or has it been such since sin entered therein to mar and defile it? We know it has not: and this fact alone is sufficient to strangle forever the idea that this earth is the sanctuary.STTHD 183.7

    2. The antitypical nature of the new-covenant sanctuary. As we have seen, the sanctuary of the former dispensation was a type of the sanctuary of the present, whatever it may be. Is it now the earth? Then the former sanctuary prefigured it. But in what respect did it represent this earth? Can it for a moment be supposed that Moses when in the mount was shown this earth as a pattern from which he was to erect the sanctuary, and that the nearest resemblance he could make of it was an oblong building ten cubits in width, and three times that number in length? And we might extend the same inquiry to the furniture of the sanctuary. What is there on this earth that answers as the antitype of the ark, the altar of incense, the golden candlestick, and the table of show-bread? But this line of thought need not be pursued further to show the utter absurdity of such a view.STTHD 184.1

    3. The use of the term. The word sanctuary occurs one hundred and forty-six times in the Bible, but is not in a single instance applied to the earth. The only texts which any one could imagine to have even a shadow of an application to this earth, are Isaiah 60:13; Ezekiel 37:26-28; Revelation 21:1-3. But these refer, not to the present, but to the future, and show simply that this earth renewed is the place where the tabernacle of God will be located hereafter.STTHD 185.1

    4. But finally, if the earth is the sanctuary now, it was just as much the sanctuary in the former dispensation. No change has taken place by which it has become the sanctuary now any more than it must have been then. But Paul says that the tabernacle built by Moses was the sanctuary then; hence the earth was not then the sanctuary, and therefore is not the sanctuary now.STTHD 185.2

    This view being such apparent folly, what shall we say of that view which makes this earth only a part of the sanctuary, and looks to Heaven for the rest? It is strange that any person of common intelligence should conceive such an idea, or for a moment endeavor seriously to defend it. The only apology we can make for it is, that its advocates, misled by our common translation, suppose that the Bible calls Heaven the most holy place. But this is no apology; for no one has a right to set himself forth as a religious teacher, who on a point so plain is not acquainted with the correct reading.STTHD 185.3

    THE LAND OF CANAAN NOT THE SANCTUARY.— The principles already presented on this subject go far toward proving the incorrectness of those views which apply the sanctuary to the land of Canaan or the church. See reasons 1, 2, 3, and 4 above stated. To prove the land of Canaan the sanctuary, appeal is made to Exodus 15:17. But if this text proves that Canaan was ever the sanctuary, it was the sanctuary then, and of that covenant. But here come these good words of Paul again, which declare that the land of Canaan was not the sanctuary then, but that the tabernacle built by Moses was. This is sufficient to settle this point. But some will not be satisfied without a further notice of a few texts. Let Exodus 15:17, then, be explained by Psalm 78:53, 54, 69. David here speaks of the same events to which Moses referred. Moses gave them as matters of prediction; David, living after their accomplishment, spoke of them as matters of history. What Moses, in the poetical license of his fervent song of triumph, speaks of as the inheritance and sanctuary, David says in more explicit terms was the border of the sanctuary, and adds that the sanctuary was something which was built therein.STTHD 186.1

    Good King Jehoshaphat makes the same distinction. 2 Chronicles 20:7-9. He speaks of the land which had been given them, and the sanctuary which they had built therein, and then says that that sanctuary was the house (Solomon’s temple) before which they stood. There is no mistaking such language, and any confusion in regard to the relation of the sanctuary to the land of Canaan is utterly inexcusable.STTHD 187.1

    Isaiah 63:18, refers to the overthrow and treading down of the house of God, the sanctuary of that time, stated in 2 Chronicles 36:17-20; and Isaiah 60:13, simply speaks of the new earth as the future glorious place of the sanctuary.STTHD 187.2

    The land of Canaan was not, and is not, the sanctuary, but simply the place where the typical sanctuary was located.STTHD 187.3

    THE CHURCH NOT THE SANCTUARY.— As regards the church, it is never once called the sanctuary. Psalm 114:2, speaks of Judah as God’s sanctuary. But this at most would only prove that a portion of the church constitutes the sanctuary, not the whole, as Judah was only one of the twelve tribes. But again, when was Judah thus called the sanctuary? When Israel went out of Egypt. And what does Paul tell us was then the sanctuary? The tabernacle built by Moses. This settles the question again. Why, then, is Judah called the sanctuary? Simply because Mount Zion was located in Judah, and on Mount Zion the sanctuary was built.STTHD 187.4

    But if Judah or the whole church was the sanctuary then, it would not be the sanctuary now; for the sanctuary of that dispensation has given place to the sanctuary of the new.STTHD 188.1

    But if the church could be shown to be the sanctuary at any time, it could not even then be the sanctuary of Daniel 8:13, 14, the only one under discussion, for the church is expressly spoken of in connection with that as the host, or worshipers, related thereto. Here the church and the sanctuary are certainly separate and distinct objects.STTHD 188.2

    Larger font
    Smaller font