OBJECTION 5. — DURATION OF CHRIST’S MINISTRY IN THE MOST HOLY PLACE

The point next in importance in the catalogue of the objector, is the duration of Christ’s final work in the second apartment of the sanctuary in Heaven. It is claimed that when his ministry had progressed therein but five years, from 1844 to 1849, the visions declared that his time to remain there was more than half expired; hence that according to the visions, he should have come long ago; and as he has not come, the visions are, in the pure vernacular of these new objectors, a “deceptive cheat!” The language upon which this objection is based, is found on page 46 of Experience and Views, as follows: “I saw that the time for Jesus to be in the most holy place was nearly finished, and that time cannot last but a very little longer.” We are accustomed, when investigating Bible questions to let one portion of the Bible explain another. Why may we not follow the same rule in reference to the visions, and let one portion of them explain another? According to this rule, the declaration that the time for Jesus to be in the most holy place was nearly finished, is explained by the sentence that immediately follows, namely, “Time cannot last but a very little longer.” See also near the top of page 47: “The sealing time is very short, and soon will be over.” When is the sealing time? It synchronizes exactly with the period during which Christ ministers in the most holy place. Well, that is very short, and soon will be over; in other words, the time for Christ to minister in the most holy place, will soon be finished. The burden of this testimony, then, is the shortness of time, and the very little space that is occupied by the sealing work and cleansing of the sanctuary.VEGW 40.1

Mark this. The idea of comparison between the time that Jesus had then been in the most holy place, and the time he was to continue there, is not introduced. The objector presents it as if the comparison was there, because in no other way does it afford the slightest ground for an objection. But it is not so expressed. It does not read, “I saw that the time for Jesus to be in the most holy place, in comparison with the time during which he has already been there, is nearly finished.” But it would have to read so, before we should have any right to infer that his time there was then more than half or three-quarters finished, as is claimed. The vision looks from the point at which it is given, out to the end, and in that direction only, and declares that the work is nearly finished. As we sincerely believe and understand it, the view is designed to impress upon the mind of the reader, simply the shortness of time and the nearness of the end.VEGW 41.1

And is not what is there shown, true as a matter of fact? Is not time almost finished? We appeal to every believer in the near advent. Could it have been truthfully expressed in any other manner? What should we have thought of a vision which had told us that his time in the most holy was not almost finished? And considering the shortness of his ministry in that apartment, would it not be true at any period of its progress, looking from that point out to the end, that it was nearly finished? There is an expression in James, stronger than any in this vision, which we believe was true in 1844, has been true ever since, and still is true: “Behold the Judge standeth before the door.”VEGW 42.1