Actually I think we should conclude that EGW was all over the map. Here she says Jesus went right into the MHP. But in another she said the door was shut until 1844.

Sabbath, March 24th, 1849, we had a sweet, and very interesting meeting with the Brethren at Topsham, Me. The Holy Ghost was poured out upon us, and I was taken off in the Spirit to the City of the living God. There I was shown that the commandments of God, and the testimony of Jesus Christ, relating to the shut door, could not be separated, and that the time for the commandments of God to shine out, with all their importance, and for God's people to be tried on the Sabbath truth, was when the door was opened in the Most Holy Place of the Heavenly Sanctuary, where the Ark is, containing the ten commandments. This door was not opened, until the mediation of Jesus was finished in the Holy Place of the Sanctuary in 1844. Then, Jesus rose up, and shut the door in the Holy Place, and opened the door in the Most Holy, and passed within the second vail, where he now stands by the Ark; and where the faith of Israel now reaches. {RH, August 1, 1849 par. 2}


In the same way you mentioned her quote regarding the lowly priestly garment that was worn on the day of atonement. But then in vision she describes Jesus wearing the wrong robe:


I saw the Father rise from the throne, and in a flaming chariot go into the holy of holies within the veil, and sit down. Then Jesus rose up from the throne, and the most of those who were bowed down arose with Him. I did not see one ray of light pass from Jesus to the careless multitude after He arose, and they were left in perfect darkness. Those who arose when Jesus did, kept their eyes fixed on Him as He left the throne and led them out a little way. Then He raised His right arm, and we heard His lovely voice saying, "Wait here; I am going to My Father to receive the kingdom; keep your garments spotless, and in a little while I will return from the wedding and receive you to Myself." Then a cloudy chariot, with wheels like flaming fire, surrounded by angels, came to where Jesus was. He stepped into the chariot and was borne to the holiest, where the Father sat. There I beheld Jesus, a great High Priest, standing before the Father. On the hem of His garment was a bell and a pomegranate, a bell and a pomegranate. Those who rose up with Jesus would send up their faith to Him in the holiest, and pray, "My Father, give us Thy Spirit." Then Jesus would breathe upon them the Holy Ghost. In that breath was light, power, and much love, joy, and peace.

Early Writings.

The bell and pomegranate robe was part of the ritual garb that the high priest usually wore, which was not on during the day of atonement, the beginning of which Ellen is portraying here.



Exodus 28:31
31"You shall make the robe of the ephod all of blue.
32"There shall be an opening at its top in the middle of it; around its opening there shall be a binding of woven work, like the opening of a coat of mail, so that it will not be torn.
33"You shall make on its hem pomegranates of blue and purple and scarlet material, all around on its hem, and bells of gold between them all around:
34a golden bell and a pomegranate, a golden bell and a pomegranate, all around on the hem of the robe.




I choose to agree with her when she said Jesus went right into the MHP. That seems to fit the text rather well.

I need to ask you the same question--does Jesus literally carry blood up to heaven to work with?

No, of course not. This is symbolical of the fact that all His actions in the heavenly sanctuary have as a basis His sacrifice.


This can be easily deduced from the OT text. If Ex 40 mentions only the anointing with oil, but Ex 29, although treating only of the priests and the altar, confirms also the sprinkling with blood, we can safely deduce that everything else was also sprinkled with blood. Besides, it is confirmed by Hebrews that this was the case, so I’m nor understanding your point.


Yes, and it would be silly to think that she contradicts herself on such an elementary point of belief.


On doing a small research about kat’eniauton some days ago, I’ve come upon this interesting quote of Josephus, which is in Wars 5.228ff:

“When he [the high priest] officiated, he had on a pair of breeches that reached beneath his privy parts to his thighs, and had on an inner garment of linen, together with a blue garment, round, without seam, with fringe work, and reaching to the feet. There were also golden bells that hung upon the fringes, and pomegranates intermixed among them. The bells signified thunder, and the pomegranates lightning. But that girdle that tied the garment to the breast was embroidered with five rows of various colors, of gold, and purple, and scarlet, as also of fine linen and blue, with which colors we told you before the veils of the temple were embroidered also. The like embroidery was upon the ephod; but the quantity of gold therein was greater. Its figure was that of a stomacher for the breast. There were upon it two golden buttons like small shields, which buttoned the ephod to the garment; in these buttons were enclosed two very large and very excellent sardonyxes, having the names of the tribes of that nation engraved upon them: on the other part there hung twelve stones, three in a row one way, and four in the other; a sardius, a topaz, and an emerald; a carbuncle, a jasper, and a sapphire; an agate, an amethyst, and a ligure; an onyx, a beryl, and a chrysolite; upon every one of which was again engraved one of the forementioned names of the tribes. A mitre also of fine linen encompassed his head, which was tied by a blue ribbon, about which there was another golden crown, in which was engraven the sacred name [of God]: it consists of four vowels. However, the high priest did not wear these garments at other times, but a more plain habit; he only did it when he went into the most sacred part of the temple, which he did but once in a year, on that day when our custom is for all of us to keep a fast to God.”

I think it’s inconceivable that Josephus was not familiar with the ritual of his own religion, of which he had participated all his life. Maybe the Bible just doesn’t describe all the details. Or perhaps we have missed some detail.

I'm not understanding why you feel a need to ask this question.

Do you think it makes any sense that Jesus would literally carry blood up to heaven to work with? Does His blood have magical powers?

A human being only has a few pints of blood, but there are thousands upon thousands of human beings for Him to cleanse. Wouldn't he run out of blood pretty quickly?

What exactly is His blood cleansing? Is what He cleanses something which could be cleansed by literal blood? Actually, is there anything at all that could be cleansed by literal blood?

Pardon my answering your question with a bunch of others, but it struck me as a very odd question. No, the blood is not literal.

Thanks. Then the DOA type of cleansing was simply the going into God's presence with the blood to present the complete sacrifice. And He already did that when He returned to heaven the first time as Hebrews states.

There is no later "blood" to apply. He died for sin, He returned to heaven and He began to reign. Everything that was needed for later forgiveness was already done.



No one would have deduced it from the OT text before reading Hebrews because it does it does not say it in the OT text.

Now I mentioned Hebrews filling in that detail. And the reason it is significant is because it shows the similarity of both services--applying blood to the mercy seat.

If Jesus is not ministering real blood up there then the only thing He really needed to do was to go where the mercy seat was (Most Holy Place) and present His completed sacrifice to His Father. And He did that.




Silly but true.



I think you are missing the point. She said in one place that He wore only the simple garb of a regular priest, and she saw in vision the other. It doesn't matter which one the priest actually wore. She says two different things.

No, I don't think it makes any sense at all. But some Adventists I have talked to think this. So I am just checking.

But frankly I don't understand how we can say that Jesus did not do exactly what was pictured in the Day of Atonement type. He went into God's presence in the MHP and presented His sacrifice. That is what was pictured.



One would think so!

I actually had one scholar say that Jesus brought back all the different "bloods" -- day of atonement, inauguration, etc.


It was a very odd way of looking at it.

At this point I think we are just going to go in circles on this one. We have quite different views of things in regard to the day of atonement allusions. But it has helped me clarify some things.


For my part I think I am done in this thread. But I will continue to study the topic out.

Thank you all for the conversation and all the time you have put in. It remained respectful and that is a big change from some of the forums I frequent.

May God bless you as you serve Him.

Repeating what I said previously, the presentation of blood (intercession) is associated with the appropriation of forgiveness by the sinner, so it couldn’t have been done before the sins themselves had been committed. Besides, the presentation of blood on the Day of Atonement was for the cleansing of the sanctuary, and of course the sanctuary can’t be cleansed while all sins haven’t been blotted out.


No. There were many purposes in Jesus’ sacrifice, and that’s the point. His sacrifice made it possible for Him to become our High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary (dedication/inauguration), His sacrifice made it possible for Him to grant us forgiveness (atonement for the sinner), and His sacrifice made it possible for Him to finally blot out our sins (atonement for the sinner/sanctuary). And we can't just lump all this together in a single presentation of blood, since these things do not all occur together.


Well, without considering the context of things, even the Bible contradicts itself.


I think you are missing the point. The Bible really seems to mention just the linen garbs in Lev. 16, but Josephus mentions the rich garment with golden bells and pomegranates. Perhaps he wore both (at different times of the day, of course). This would deserve further research.


Thank you too, and may God continue to bless you.

Ok, but simply reading what I had written would make it clear that I couldn't possibly be holding to this idea. However, I understand you've been focusing your attention more on Rosangela.

I believe the ceremonies were given to communicate essential truths. I thinks the truths relate to what Christ is doing, not to furniture or physical layouts of things in heaven.



Well, I guess that's what's being disputed. A couple of problems I see with this idea are:

a.The scapegoat doesn't seem to fit in this idea.
b.It doesn't seem to fit chronologically with the type. That is, the DOA would occur out of order. (e.g. before Pentecost).
c.It would make Dan. 8:14 into a rather trivial event, it seems to me, having nothing to do with Christ, nor the 70 weeks vision, which culminates in His sacrifice at Calvary.

Practically all the debates about the subject of the Sanctuary and of the Investigative Judgment either between SDAs and the evangelicals or among SDAs themselves has revolved around questions which admit both a Yes and a No as an answer, depending on the viewpoint of the person involved.

For instance: according to the book of Hebrews, could Christ have gone to minister in the most holy place at His ascension? Answer: Yes or No. There are ambiguities in the text of the epistle, especially in relation to the translation of the word ta hagia.

Another example: Heb. 6:19, 20 says that Jesus entered within the veil. Does this mean He entered within the first veil or the second veil? It could be the first, or it could be the latter.

Still another example: Does God need to judge His people? Answer: No. But will He judge them? Answer: Yes. Will this judgment be according to the Adventist description? Maybe yes, maybe no.

Because we are dealing with subject matter that is immeasurable and requires interpretation, neither position can be proven or disproven.

However, there are mathematical and astronomical data which can’t be manipulated or contested. I'll briefly mention some of them. Going back 486.5 years from Nisan 14/15 of the year 31 AD (the Jewish date for Christ’s death), one arrives at a 10th day of the 7th month (a Day of Atonement) of the year 457 BC. Going forward 2300 years from this point, one also reaches a Day of Atonement at the end of the period (1844). This can only be possible because 2300 years has an exact number of lunations, bringing into harmony the solar year and the lunar month, otherwise it would have been impossible to begin at a Day of Atonement and to arrive at a Day of Atonement. The synchronism of all the dates in this prophecy is amazing, and if the prophecy isn't true, its "coincidences" are among the greatest coincidences of all time.