OBJECTION 50. — CHRIST’S ENTRY INTO THE HOLY PLACE

The visions represent that Christ entered into the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary in 1844. The objector here finds a contradiction by asserting that Christ entered the holiest over 1800 years ago; and this is the way he attempts to prove it:VEGW 119.1

“1. What is Christ’s office in this dispensation? Answer — High Priest. 2. Where did the high priest, in the type, go to officiate once a year? Answer — Into the department which Paul calls the ‘holy place:’ ‘The high priest entered into the holy place every year.’ Hebrews 9:25. 3. Into what place did Christ enter 1800 years ago? Answer — Into the ‘holy place’ (Hebrews 9:12) — a place bearing the same name of the place into which Paul says the high priest entered, in the type, elsewhere called the most holy place or holiest or ‘most holy place,’ 1800 years ago, Paul talks to his brethren about having boldness to enter into the HOLIEST by the blood of Jesus,’ (Hebrews 10:19), which would have been an impossibility provided Christ had not gone there himself till 1844.”VEGW 119.2

The writer of the foregoing wonderful argument, has a great passion for flourishing the original Greek, when he thinks it favors his position, but is significantly silent with regard to it, when it goes against him. In every instance where he has mentioned the holy place or holiest in the preceding argument, it is the original in the plural and should be rendered, holy places. Thus Hebrews 9:25, reads, “The High priest entereth into holy places every year, with the blood of others.” Hebrews 9:12, reads, “By his own blood he entered in once [once for all, Gr.] into the holy places.” True it is a “place bearing the same name as the place into which the high priest entered in the type;” but the name is in the plural, and so completely spoils the objector’s argument. So when Paul talks to his brethren about having boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,” it is still plural, and should be rendered holy places. It proves that Christ is a minister in both apartments of heavenly sanctuary, and that we, through the merits of his blood, can find in him a High Priest and Saviour in the most holy as well as in the holy place, in the second, as well as in the first, apartment of the heavenly sanctuary. The reader has but to know the fact that in texts quoted the words are in the plural, meaning holy places, and the objector’s arguments at once vanish, either as a piece of bad criticism, or an effort to mislead.VEGW 119.3

Another quotes Hebrews 6:19, 20, and says that Paul was incorrect if our High Priest did not enter within the veil till 1844. This writer forgot that the first apartment of the sanctuary was closed with a veil as well as the second, and that when Christ entered into the first apartment he entered within the vail, as truly as when he entered into the second.VEGW 120.1