No, I don't; but rather, the context of question and answer and angelic interpretation that the horn is a man, a king and NOT a series of popes.

READ THE INTERPRETATION GIVEN BY THE ANGEL OF GOD.

///

Dan 8:20 "The ram which you saw, having the two horns-they are the kings of Media and Persia.

Kings could be individual men.

Dan 8:21 "And the male goat is the kingdom of Greece. The large horn that is between its eyes is the first king.

First king. Sounds like individual man.

Dan 8:22 "As for the broken horn and the four that stood up in its place, four kingdoms shall arise out of that nation, but not with its power.

Kingdoms? That doesn't sound like individuals.

Could you explore this "horn" idea more?

No doubt it will break His heart. And it did on the cross. What do you feel could be some of His purposes for punishing the sinners?

According to Raymond Cottrell....
Yes Cottrell as well as Des Ford made those assertions on Daniel 8.
To me it simply shows that the study of Biblical bases for the Adventist sanctuary doctrine had been hugely neglected in the years previous. Those assertions woke a lot of Adventists up to study the issues for themselves.
Some agreed with Ford and Cottrell, but others found solid Biblical evidence supporting the doctrine.

From what I have read, I have seen every criticism answered and they have shown those assertions against the doctrine to be without foundation.



Some good questions have been raised --
but before answering I think we need to understand why this doctrine makes perfect sense to some and why it does not to others.
It has to do with one's world view.

Now I think all here believe in a personal God, and believe salvation is only in Jesus Christ. So that narrows the wide range of world views down to biblical based world views.

A popular world view in theology is basically focused on "personal salvation". In that world view, salvation is all about us. Humans are in a mess, Christ came to seek and save the lost, accept Him and be saved.

The world view that Adventist's embraced includes "personal salvation" but sees it in a much bigger light called the cosmic conflict or "great controversy" in which this earth is a "theater of the universe". It's not just about saving us, though that is a very important part of it, but it also includes fully convincing all created beings in the whole universe that God is pure unselfish love, that He is just, His rule is wonderful, His laws are perfect and He can be perfectly trusted. The whole drama here on earth is allowed, for it is necessary to convince all throughout all eternity future that sin is terrible, that God is wonderful, good and gracious, and never again will sin raise its ugly head.

In the end all will joyfully sing "Lord God Almighty; just and true [are] thy ways, thou King of saints.: Rev. 15:3

It will not be a happy time. In fact I think it will be a very painful time for the saved (not just for those who perish in the lake of fire)

Why are they raised?
Just some suggestions.

First let's look at
1 Cor. 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
(22) For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. (23) Each in his own order....

Notice the wording -- "all be made alive".

Christ's death and resurrection brings the gift of life!
His resurrection broke the power of the first death -- ALL will be resurrected, each in their sequential order.


If Christ didn't resurrect the lost, the question of "why" would remain -- some would think, "Surely if they just SAW what Christ was offering them they would accept Christ?

So they are raised and they SEE -- they see not only the glittering city, they see Jesus, they are shown everything Christ did to win them.
They now fully understand what they rejected, but do they repent?

But it appears that none repent. And it is fully seen that God's decision to exclude them was the right decision.
They CHOSE not to be in God's kingdom.

Their resurrection was a gift of life bought for them at Calvary. But it did them no good. Then it is demonstrated clearly that they have rejected Christ and His gift of life.


The words in Hebrews 10:28-29 applies == ... "who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?"

I get your point with this explanation, and it is hardly a new explanation. I have sometimes explained it to myself in the same manner. But the more I consider it, the more I see it as a flawed justification.

Consider this: Jesus said there will be those who say "Lord, Lord!" who are not in the kingdom. Why? They wanted to be there. They worked to save others. Perhaps they see themselves as willing to do anything for Jesus. But they have been neglectful. And now it is simply too late.

I think there comes a time when it will be simply too late. Every case will be decided. They did have opportunity, but they failed to improve upon it. They were unfaithful servants, not wicked enemies. (Of course, the argument could be made that no one sits on the fence, and those not on the Lord's side are on the side of His enemies--but Jesus doesn't call them enemies, He speaks of them as His unfaithful servants.)

It is my view that the ones raised in the third resurrection know full well that God is giving no second chances at that point. Why, then, should they vainly attempt to repent? His Spirit has left them, and they no longer hear His wooing voice. They no longer have any desire to repent. If the Holy Spirit still strove with them, they very well might. But it is forever too late. The invitation is closed.

That is, at least, my perspective. I do not know what will happen to me if I should be in that group, but I have often imagined to myself that I would not join in Satan's last rebellion. What would be the point of it? We know how that will turn out, don't we? I would just sorrowfully sit down to accept my fate. It's easy to imagine last words spoken between relatives between the bars of the city's gates. It's easy to daydream about "what ifs." But I don't think it's best. We should focus on our present work, our own individual standing before God, and on the salvation of those around us. Let us do all we can on our part now, before the "too late!" cry is heard.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

The plan of salvation shields us from fully suffering the consequences of sinning the instant we sin. The consequences of sinning was - The day you sin is the day you die eternally. But Jesus stepped in and suffered A&E sin debt of death and afforded them a second chance at eternal life. That's why they didn't die the day they sinned.

Had A&E died the day they sinned the consequences would have been a short and painful death. However, now that we live a long life of sin - our accumulated debt is much greater (all of which is quarantined within the body of Jesus until its future fate is determined: 1) perishes with Satan in the lake of fire, or 2) perishes with sinners in the lake of fire).

Because we live a long life of sinning, we accumulate a greater sin debt which means we will suffer greater intensity of pain and longer duration the day we are judged and found wanting and deserving of punishment and eternal death. There is nothing arbitrary about it. The intensity and duration is tied to our sin debt of death. Jesus will remove the protection salvation affords us now and allow us to experience the accumulated force of our sins.

Satan knows what will happen to him. What would be the point of satan leading the rebellion?

But what would be the purpose?

I'm not entirely sure. Resurrecting them and judging them and then hearing them say they deserve to die eternally is essential to the eternal security of the everyone in the Universe. Allowing them to suffer in duration and in intensity proportionate to their sinfulness enables us to understand more clearly the cost of rebellion and the cost Jesus paid on the Cross to redeem us. It doesn't entirely make sense to me now but I believe it will when Jesus explains it in detail.