Did Christ Enter the Most Holy Place in 1844?

WES RINGER | Former Adventist Bible Translation Consultant |

I keep thinking that these words from the Sound of Music, “Let’s start at the very beginning, it’s a very good place to start” give very good advice for anyone seeking to test Ellen White’s claims to have received visions from the Holy Spirit.  My other article analyzed her first vision and gave a bit of the background as to what led me to research issues relating to 1844, the shut-door and Ellen White’s first seven years of visions from 1844-1851. In this article I would like to take an in-depth look into her second vision.

Ellen White’s second vision occurred in February, 1845, at Exeter, Maine, and was published in the Day-Star on March 14, 1846, which was same shut-door Adventist paper that had published her first vision. In both her first and second visions, she spoke of seeing a great light come to people, which many rejected. In the first vision an angel tells her that this light was the Midnight Cry, which was the proclamation that Jesus was coming on October 22, 1844. Those who denied this light found that the light went out and they stumbled off the path to the New Jerusalem down into the dark and wicked world below. “It was just as impossible for them to get on the path again and go to the City, as all the wicked world which God had rejected.” Likewise, in her second vision she saw the Son wave a bright light over the people. 

Then I saw an exceeding bright light come from the Father to the Son and from the Son it waved over the people before the throne. But few would receive this great light. Many came out from under it and immediately resisted it. Others were careless and did not cherish the light and it moved off from them. Some cherished it and went and bowed down before the throne with the little praying company. This company all received the light, and rejoiced in it as their countenances shone with its glory. Then I saw the Father rise from the throne and in a flaming chariot go into the Holy of Holies within the vail, and did sit. There I saw thrones which I had not seen before. Then Jesus rose up from the throne, and most of those who were bowed down rose up with him. And I did not see one ray of light pass from Jesus to the careless multitude after he rose up, and they were left in perfect darkness.

In a letter that she wrote to Joseph Bates on July 13, 1847, she said that both her first and second visions confirmed others in the shut-door. She said this to him about her second vision: 

Sister Durben knew what the power of the Lord was, for she had felt it many times; and a short time after I fell she was struck down, and fell to the floor, crying to God to have mercy on her. When I came out of vision, my ears were saluted with Sister Durben’s singing and shouting with a loud voice. Most of them received the vision, and were settled upon the shut door. Previous to this I had no light on the coming of the Bridegroom, but had expected Him to [come to] this earth to deliver His people on the tenth day of the seventh month. I did not hear a lecture or a word in any way relating to the Bridegroom’s going to the Holiest.

She also told Bates in this letter that her first vision was in agreement with Joseph Turner and that his paper was in the house, but that she had not read it. Turner and Hale wrote in the January, 1845, Advent Mirror extensively about the significance of Jesus entering within the veil into the Most Holy Place on October 22, 1844.

The coming of the bridegroom would point out some change of work or office, on the part of our Lord, in the invisible world, and the going in with him a corresponding change on the part of his true people. With him it is within the veil—where he has gone to prepare a place for us; with them it is outside the veil, where they wait and keep themselves ready till they pass in to the marriage supper.

One is also struck by the similarity between what she saw in this second vision and what Hiram Edson saw in some type of a vision he had, on October 23, 1844, the morning after the great disappointment, as he went through a cornfield. 

“Heaven seemed open to my view, and I saw distinctly and clearly, that instead of our high priest coming out of the Most Holy of the heavenly sanctuary to come to this earth on the tenth day of the seventh month, at the end of the 2300 days, that he for the first time entered on that day the second apartment of that sanctuary, and that he had a work to perform in the Most Holy before coming to this earth. 

Despite Ellen White’s denials to Bates, “I did not hear a lecture or a word in any way relating to the Bridegroom’s going to the Holiest,” it seems quite likely that before her second vision, she would have already heard or read about both Edson’s vision and Turner’s article about Christ entering the Holiest. Turner was a close friend of her family, and she acknowledged that his paper was in her house, but she denied having read it. She though that he would oppose her vision, and expressed surprise when she found that his views agreed with her vision. It is also important to note, that neither Hiram Edson nor Ellen White came to their understanding of Christ entering for the first time into the Most Holy Place in 1844 from a careful study of Daniel 8–9, or Hebrews, but rather each through a vision was trying to understand what had happened when Christ failed to return on October 22, 1844. However, both visions contradict what Daniel and the writer of Hebrews had to say in many ways. While it took almost another ten years for the doctrine of the investigative judgement to become fully formed, its foundation ultimately rested on these two visions, which both attempted to find a fulfillment that showed that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 were 2300 years that ended on October 22, 1844.

William Miller had used Daniel 8–9 as just one of his fifteen proofs that Jesus was coming in 1843, and then managed to move that date forward to March of 1844. He arrived at this conclusion by completely ignoring the context of Daniel 8, where it was the actions of a wicked Greek king, called “the little horn,” who stopped the daily sacrifices in the earthly sanctuary for 2300 evening mornings, which were 1150 days, and after that the sanctuary was cleansed, so that it could function again. Note that this cleansing was from the action of this Greek king, and did not refer to the day of Atonement, when the sanctuary was cleansed from the sins of the people of Israel. Instead he held the 2300 days to be actual years and understood the sanctuary to be cleansed as the earth from sin and sinners at the second coming of Christ in 1844. To achieve this, he had to have the 2300 days of Daniel 8 start at the same time as the 70 weeks of Daniel 9, in order to arrive at Jesus returning in 1844. By doing so, he also ignored the context of Daniel 9, by making the actions of this Greek king “the little horn” in Daniel 8 begin at the same time as the command by the Persian king Artaxerxes to rebuild Jerusalem in 457 BC, which was more than a hundred years before this Greek king could have been born. 

However, in Daniel 8 it was the action of this wicked Greek king that causes the earthly sanctuary to cease to function for 2300 evening-mornings, and then to be restored, which occurred before the end of the seventy-week prophecy in Daniel 9. In the middle of the last of the seventy weeks of Daniel 9, the Messiah would be cut off, and then the earthly sanctuary would be destroyed, an event which occurred in 70 AD when the Romans destroyed both the sanctuary and the city of Jerusalem. Daniel 9:24 affirmed that the death of the Messiah was “…to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy.” It is clear from the context that the sanctuary in both Daniel 8 and 9 was the earthly sanctuary in Jerusalem.

Edson and Ellen White’s visions led them to understand that it was not the earth that needed to be cleansed, but it was the sanctuary in heaven, where Jesus went as our high priest for the first time into the most holy place on October 22, 1844. But what action by this Greek king beginning in 457 BC would have caused the heavenly sanctuary to need cleansing? And when did Jesus begin his work as our high priest in the heavenly sanctuary? The writer of Hebrews is clear that Jesus could not serve as priest under the old covenant, because he was not from the tribe of Levi. And to serve as our high priest he must first have a sacrifice to offer, so that only after he had sacrificed himself and ascended to heaven could he then serve as a mediator and high priest of a new and better covenant in the heavenly sanctuary.

Secondly, EGW often saw in vision that Jesus stood by the ark because his work of cleansing the Most Holy Place was just beginning in 1844, while in contrast, four times the writer of Hebrews saw that Jesus as our high priest sat down at the right hand of God, symbolizing that his work of atonement was finished.

ELLEN G. WHITE	HEBREWS
Ellen White saw, “Above the ark, where the angels stood, was an exceeding bright glory, that appeared like a throne where God dwelt. Jesus stood by the ark. And as the saints’ prayers came up to Jesus, the incense in the censor would smoke, and He offered up the prayers of the saints with the smoke of the incense to His Father.”	Hebrews 1:3 The Son is the radiance of Godʼs glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.
Ellen White saw, “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 veil, where he now stands by the Ark; and where the faith of Israel now reaches.”	Hebrews 8:1-2 1The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man.
Ellen White saw, “Then again was held up before me those who were not willing to dispose of this world’s goods to save perishing souls, by sending them the truth, while Jesus stands before the Father, pleading his blood, his sufferings and his death for them; and while God’s messengers were waiting, ready to carry them the saving truth that they might be sealed with the seal of the living God.”	Hebrews 10:11-14 11Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. 13Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, 14because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy. Hebrews 12:2 Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Ellen White also saw that Jesus went through the second veil into the Most Holy Place for the first time on October 22, 1844. There was a veil at the door of the sanctuary, and a second veil between the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place. Hebrews 6:19-20 states that our hope enters within the veil where Jesus our high priest has entered on our behalf. In Exodus and Leviticus, within the veil always refers to this second veil between the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place, where only on the Day of Atonement was the earthly high priest allowed to enter to sprinkle blood on the mercy seat to make atonement where God dwelt in glory. However by saying that Jesus did not enter through the second veil until 1844, she was denying that Jesus entered into the Most Holy Place when he ascended.

In Hebrews 9:7-28 the writer compares and contrasts the differences between the work of the high priest on the Day of Atonement in the earthly sanctuary, with the work of Christ as our high priest in the heavenly sanctuary. The high priest entered the Most Holy Place once a year and always with the blood of a bull and goat, to make atonement for his sins and the sins of the people. However, in contrast, Jesus entered the heavenly Most Holy Place once for all by means of his own blood, which cleansed our consciences from sin that leads to death. This is the reason that Christ is now the mediator of a new covenant, because his death was a ransom that freed his people from their sins. Nor did Christ need to enter the Most Holy Place again and again as the earthly high priest did each year with blood not his own, otherwise Jesus would have had to be sacrificed many times since the beginning of the world. But by his one sacrifice, he has taken away the sins of many people. The only thing that yet remained to be done was for him to come again to bring salvation to his people. 

In Hebrews 10, the writer compares and contrasts the many animal sacrifices offered under the first covenant that could never take away sins, with Christ’s one sacrifice under the new covenant that has forever dealt with sin. He states that the priest stands daily offering sacrifice after sacrifice that could never takeaway sin, but that Christ after offering one sacrifice sat down at the right hand of God, which signified that his work was finished. By his one sacrifice, he has made forever perfect those whom is he making holy. The writer concludes that since sins have really been forgiven and forgotten, there is no need for any further sacrifice for sins. Because Christ cleansed the heavenly sanctuary when he ascended, first century believers were then able to enter with bold confidence through the veil, by means of his blood, into the Most Holy Place. In the Old Covenant this veil blocked access to God and protected the priests and high priests from seeing the glory of God, which would have brought death to them. In the New Covenant the veil was the body of Christ, through which we who believe come into the presences of our holy God, because his sacrifice has caused our sins to be forever forgiven and forgotten. 

In Hebrews 13:11-12, the writer once again contrasts the work of the earthly high priest on the Day of Atonement with the work of Christ as our high priest.  11”The high priest carries the blood of animals into the Most Holy Place as a sin offering, but the bodies are burned outside the camp. 12And so Jesus also suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy through his own blood.” It was only on the Day of Atonement that the high priest brought the blood of a bull and goat into the Most Holy Place and had their bodies burned outside of the camp. The writer of the book of Hebrews gives no hint that the heavenly sanctuary had any need of further cleansing.

However, Ellen White in her second vision sees a very different picture than the one that the writer of Hebrews depicts. 

Then I saw the Father rise from the throne and in a flaming chariot go into the Holy of Holies within the veil, and did sit. There I saw thrones which I had not seen before. Then Jesus rose up from the throne, and most of those who were bowed down rose up with him. And I did not see one ray of light pass from Jesus to the careless multitude after he rose up, and they were left in perfect darkness. Those who rose up 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 ye, 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. And I saw a cloudy chariot with wheels like flaming fire. Angels were all about the chariot as it came where Jesus was; he stepped into it and was borne to the Holiest where the Father sat. Then I beheld Jesus as he was standing before the Father a great High Priest.

She implies but does not state that this throne that both the Father and Jesus left was in the Holy Place. The inner room in the earthly sanctuary was Most Holy because it was the place where God dwelt in glory. However contrary to the type, Ellen White saw that neither the Father nor Jesus were in the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary until October 22, 1844. She then connected the Son’s entrance into the Most Holy Place with the shut-door by saying,  “And I did not see one ray of light pass from Jesus to the careless multitude after he rose up, and they were left in perfect darkness.” Then she saw that Satan had now come near the empty throne of God in the Holy Place and was answering the prayers of those who did not realize that God the Father and Jesus had left this throne to go into the Most Holy Place.

Then I turned to look at the company who were still bowed before the throne. They did not know that Jesus had left it. Satan appeared to be by the throne trying to carry on the work of God. I saw them look up to the throne and pray, My Father give us thy spirit. Then Satan would breathe on them an unholy influence. In it there was light and much power, but no sweet love, joy and peace. Satan’s object was to keep them deceived and to draw back and deceive God’s children. I saw one after another leave the company who were praying to Jesus in the Holiest, go and join those before the throne and they at once received the unholy influence of Satan.

Here she stressed that believers must know that the Father and Jesus had moved from the Holy Place to the Most Holy Place in the heavenly sanctuary on October 22, 1844, so that they would re-direct their prayers to the right place, to be answered by God rather than by Satan. In the earthly sanctuary, the second room was Most Holy, because it was the place were God dwelt in glory. Therefore, when Hebrews affirmed that at his ascension, Christ was seated at the right hand of God, there would never be a time when believers would need to know when to redirect their prayers to another place that the Father and Jesus had just entered.

In  The Day-Star Extra published in February 7, 1846, O. R. L. Crosier wrote in detail about the significance that he saw in Christ entering the Most Holy Place for the very first time on October 22, 1844. Crosier would later acknowledge that he wrote this article to confirm his belief in the shut-door, which by 1849 he had given up as being unbiblical. However, Ellen White saw in vision that Crosier in this article had the true light on the cleansing of the sanctuary,” and James White reprinted Crosier’s article in the September 1850 Advent Review. 

It was Crosier’s basic contention that every aspect of the type in the Levitical earthly sanctuary  and its service must be fulfilled by Christ. From there he attempted to show how Christ had fulfilled all the Jewish yearly festivals, except for the Day of Atonement. He denied that Christ had made atonement on the cross, nor did he cleanse the new covenant sanctuary at his ascension, because he believed the 2300 days were 2300 years extending 1810 years beyond the end of the 70 weeks.

“But if the Lord’s new covenant Sanctuary was then cleansed, the 2300 days ended then: but if they are years, which we all believe, they extend 1810 years beyond the 70 weeks, and the last of those weeks was the first of the new covenant or Gospel Dispensation. The fact that those days reach 1810 years beyond the 70 weeks, and the Sanctuary could not be cleansed till the end of those days, is demonstration that the antitype of the legal tenth day is not the Gospel Dispensation; but a period following that Dispensation.”

Crosier specifically dealt with Hebrews 6:19-20 and asserted that it taught that Jesus went into the first apartment or Holy Place at his ascension. Crosier contended that since the second curtain mentioned in Hebrews 9:3 refers to the veil that separated the Holy from the Most Holy Place, then the veil in Hebrews 6:19-20 must be referring to the first veil at the door of the sanctuary. Therefore, he concluded that Christ entered through this first veil into the Holy Place when he ascended. This first veil at the door of the sanctuary is mentioned six times in the Law of Moses. Leviticus 16, which describes in great detail what the high priest did in the sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. On that day the high priest had to go through this first veil to enter the sanctuary and return to the courtyard a number of times, but this first veil was never mentioned. However, Leviticus 16 does mention three times that the high priest entered within the veil into the second room to sprinkle blood on the ark of the covenant.

The Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke each mentioned that the veil in the temple was torn in two at the death of Christ, which signified the ending of the Old Covenant, and the beginning of the New Covenant. Likewise the writer of Hebrews mentions that Christ entered through the veil as our high priest. Since the term within the veil was always used to refer to the Most Holy Place, then clearly the writer of Hebrews intended his readers to understand that Christ had entered into the Most Holy Place at his ascension. This inner veil is also in view in Hebrews 10:19-22 which states:

19Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, 20by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, 21and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water.

While the earthly high priest was required to bring the blood of animals into the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement, he always entered under the fear of death. However, here the writer of Hebrews affirms that believers since the first century have had confidence to enter through the veil by means of the blood of Jesus into the presents of God in the Most Holy Place.

Crosier and other Seventh-day Adventist commentators have made much of the fact that the Holy of Holies is used only once in in Hebrews 9:3. But, what they ignore is that the Law of Moses only uses the term Holy of Holies twice. Leviticus 16 uses the term the Holy Place four times  and only once the Most Holy Place, yet all five times it is referring to the second room where the high priest went through the veil to sprinkle blood on the ark of the covenant. This underlines the fact that the meaning of a given term is determined by the context in which it is used. The same holds true in Hebrews for the five times that the KJV and NASB use Holy Place where the NIV uses Most Holy Place. If it is the room where the high priest enters once a year with blood, then it is referring to the second room which is the Most Holy Place.

Crosier’s reasoning rested solely on his felt need to explain what had happened at the end of the 2300 days, rather than seeking to understand what the writer of Hebrews had to say about the work of Christ as our high priest. Thus, the traditional Adventist understanding of Christ’s entering the Most Holy Place in 1844 rests on the assumption that Crosier was correct in denying that atonement was made at the cross and that he correctly understood Hebrews to be showing that Christ entered the Holy and not the Most Holy Place at his ascension. 

Unfortunately, Crosier’s basic argument that as in the type, so in the antitype was faulty. He employs this assumption to demonstrate the need for the future fulfillment of the Day of Atonement to happen many years after Christ’s ascension, because Jesus must first minister for over eighteen hundred years in Holy Place before he could enter into the Most Holy Place at the end of the 2300 days. However, the writer of Hebrews never speaks of Jesus ministering as our high priest in the Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary, but asserts that Jesus fulfilled the work of the earthly high priest on the Day of Atonement when as our High Priest he entered by means of his own blood into the heavenly Most Holy Place. By following Crosier’s same line of reasoning, one could also conclude that Christ must be sacrificed again and again in order to fulfill all the various sacrificial offerings mentioned in the Law of Moses.

Prior to October 22, 1844, the Millerites had accepted the general consensus of Bible commentators concerning the book of Hebrews. They held that Christ, by virtue of His once-for-all atonement for sins, became our high priest in the heavenly sanctuary. Because of His blood, believers could come with boldness through the veil into the very presence of God. They believed that Christ would leave the Most Holy Place on October 22, 1844, in fulfillment of the antitypical Day of Atonement and come in the clouds of heaven. When Christ failed to return Turner and Hale, in the Advent Mirror of January 1845, argued that the “heavenly things” mentioned in Hebrews 9:23 that must be cleansed with a better sacrifice than animals’ blood referred to Christ’s cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary beginning on October 22, 1844. 

However, Bliss, an open-door Adventist, countered by noting that Hebrews 7:27, 9:12, 24, and 10:12-14 clearly taught that Christ had already cleansed the heavenly things mentioned in Hebrew 9:23 with the sacrifice of himself 1800 years before.

“This sacrifice was offered ‘once when he offered up himself,’ Heb. 7:27. He then ascended to the Father and ‘entered once into the holy place having obtained eternal redemption for us’ 9:12; ‘for Christ is not entered into the holy place made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself now to appear in the presence of God for us,’ 9:24. Christ having done this, ‘after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, forever sat down on the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his foot-stool; for by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified, —10:12-14. This preparation must therefore have all been made, not on the 22^nd of October, but eighteen hundred years ago.”

So, what are we to conclude, after looking at Ellen White’s first and second vision? That these visions confirmed to those who believed them that sinners could no longer be saved, because the door was shut on October 22, 1844. These two visions prevented her and all other shut-door Adventist from preaching the good news that Jesus still saves sinners for over seven years. Secondly, they caused Ellen and James White to conspire to mislead people about her shut-door beliefs by deleting over 6% of her first vision when they republished it in the Review and Herald Extra of July 21, 1851. This has lead others to cover up until the 1970’s the letter that she wrote to Bates in 1847 confirming that these visions caused her to believe in the shut-door, and to a continued pattern of dishonesty among Adventist officials, who are trying to defend her prophetic status. Thirdly, this second vision has prevented Seventh-day Adventists from understanding that the main point of Hebrews is that Jesus has fulfilled the work of the high priest on the Day of Atonement, when having made purification for sins he sat down at the right hand of God. 

There is a long history of men like Ballenger, Conradi, Fletcher and Desmond Ford, who have seen the problems of the church’s understanding of Hebrews, but in bringing this to the church’s attention, they have suffered reproof or been disfellowshipped. When I first saw this problem in November 1970, I had no knowledge that these men had grappled with this same issue before me. Ellen White’s visions do not lead to a clear understanding of the Word of God, and therefore they are not to be trusted. And if these first two visions have failed the test, then Ellen White has failed the test in her claim that her visions where given to her by the Holy Spirit. 

Finally, this second vision was the foundation on which the doctrine of the investigative judgment was built, in which she taught that at some point just before Christ returns we must live without a mediator. 

Those who are living upon the earth when the intercession of Christ shall cease in the sanctuary above are to stand in the sight of a holy God without a mediator. Their robes must be spotless, their character must be purified from sin by the blood of sprinkling. Through the Grace of God and their own diligent effort they must be conquerors in the battle of evil.

It was her teaching about living without a mediator that has led many Seventh-day Adventists, like myself, to have despaired that they ever would be saved. However, in contrast Hebrews 7:25 affirms, “Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.” 

If then Ellen White’s first two visions do not pass the test that they have come from God, then the words of Deuteronomy 18:21-22 apply to her prophetic claims. 21You may say to yourselves, “How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the Lord?” 22If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him. †

---

Endnotes

1. Deuteronomy 18:21-22 says that what a prophet says must come true, or God has not spoken through him. Paul tells us in 1 Thessalonians 5:19-21 to test prophecies and to hold on to what is good. If we wish Mormons and Muslims to test their prophet, even if it would cause loss of relationships or death, then we should also test Ellen White’s prophetic claims.
2. Wesley Ringer, Why were Parts of Ellen White’s First Vision Deleted? at wesleyringer@gmail.com 
3. Ellen G. Harmon, “Letter from Sister Harmon, Falmouth, Mass., Feb., 1846,” The Day-Star, March 14, 1846. See The Shut-door and the Sanctuary: Appendix V: A-56 for the full text of this vision. 
4. Ellen G. Harmon, “Letter from Sister Harmon. Portland, Me., Dec, 20, 1845.” The Day-Star, January 24, 1846, vol. 9, no. 7&8, p. 31. See Ibid. Appendix IV: A-49 for the full text of this vision.
5. Ellen G. White, “Letter to Bates, July 13, 1847.” Read why this letter hidden for so long and what is its significance in Adventist Currents, 1.4  www.hacksplace.com; or see The Shut-door and the Sanctuary, Appendix VIII: A-71 for the full text of this letter.
6. Apollos Hale, Joseph Turner, The Advent Mirror, January 1845, vol. 1, no. 1. See Ibid. p. 83
7. Knight, Rise of Sabbatarian Adventism, p. 126, quoted by Dale Ratzlaff, Cultic Doctrine of Seventh-day Adventism, p. 157
8. See The Shut-door and the Sanctuary: Chapter VIII “From the Shut-door to investigative judgement: Legacy of Guilt” p. 78-93.
9. Miller’s fifteen proofs: Evaluate these fifteen proofs to see if Miller’s used sound methods of Bible study in the Cultic Doctrine of Seventh-day Adventism, Dale Ratzlaff, p. 51-81, or Ibid. Appendix II: A-40. I have read the Great Controversy p. 317-432, beginning with chapter 20, A Great Religious Awakening to the end of chapter 28, The Investigative Judgement. Ellen White mentions Miller’s understanding of Daniel 8:14 many times in those pages, while never mentioning any other verse in Daniel 8. Miller again and again took a verse or verses out of context in each of his 15 proofs, in order to be able to prove that Jesus was coming in 1843-44.
10. Note: Almost all Bible commentators believe this Greek king to be Antiochus IV Epiphanes. “Antiochus IV Epiphanes instituted sacrifices to his gods in the temple on the twenty-fifth of Kislev (December) in the year 167 B.C., but he had put a stop to the Jewish rituals some time earlier that year (reported in 1 Maccabees 1:44-51), and the exact date of the proclamation and its enforcement is not known. The rededication of the temple in the aftermath of the Maccabean revolt took place three years to the day after the desecration on the twenty-fifth of Kislev, 164 B.C.” From IVP Bible Background Commentary Old Testament, InterVarsity Press, 2000, Daniel 8:14.
11. Read about Antiochus Epiphanes defiling the sanctuary and how it was cleansed in 1 Maccabees 1:41-64, 4:36-61
12. See Hebrews 7:11-28; Hebrews 8:1-6; 9:11-15.
13. E. G. White, Broadside – A Vision, April 1847. See The Shut-door and the Sanctuary: Appendix VI: A-54, for the full text of this vision.
14. Within the veil always refers to the Most Holy Place: Ex 26:33; Lev. 16: 2, 12, 15; Numbers 18:7. Outside the veil refers to the Holy Place: Ex 26:35; 27:20, 21; 40:22. In front of the veil refers to the Holy Place: Ex. 30:6-10; Ex 40:26; Lev. 4:5, 6, 17; 24:1-3.
15. Read about the high priest’s work on the Day of Atonement in Leviticus 16, Hebrews 9-10, 13:11-12.
16. NASB translates the holy place in the following verses while the NIV and Good News translate the same Hebrew or Greek word as most holy place: Leviticus 16:2,16,17,20,23,27; Hebrews 9:8,12,25; 10:19; 13:11. KJV likewise translates holy place like the NASB in all these verses except in Hebrews 9:8 & 10:10 where it translates holiest, and in 13:11 it translates sanctuary. NLT also translates Most Holy Place in all of these verses except Hebrews 13:11.
17. Hebrews 10:11-14.
18. Hebrews 10:18-22.
19. See Hebrews 10:17-18.
20. The blood of the sin offering was normally sprinkled on the altar of burn offerings in the courtyard, however Leviticus 4 speaks that for certain sins the blood of a bull was brought into the Holy Place and sprinkled on the altar of incense and the its body is burned outside the camp. 
21. Ellen G. Harmon, “Letter from Sister Harmon,” The Day-Star March 14, 1846. See The Shut-door and the Sanctuary: Appendix V: A-52 for the full text of this letter.
22. Ibid.
23. Ibid.
24. O.R.L. Crosier, “Letter to A. F. Dagger, Feb. 20, 1899. See The Shut-door and the Sanctuary: p. 45.
25. Ellen White, “Letter to Eli Curtis,” A Word to the Little Flock, 1847, See The Shut-door and the Sanctuary: p. 12.
26. O. R. L. Crosier, “The Sanctuary,” The Advent Review, September 1850, vol. 1, no. 3. p. 42-47, O. R. L. Crosier, “The Priesthood”, The Advent Review September 1850, vol. 1, no. 4, p. 57-63.
27. O. R. L. Crosier, “The Law of Moses,” The Day-Star Extra, February 7, 1846, vol. 9, p. 41. But if the Lord’s new covenant Sanctuary was then cleansed, “then cleansed” refers to the end of the seventy weeks of Daniel 9. 
28. The veil at the door of the sanctuary: See Exodus 26:36, 35:15, 36:37, 40:5, 28, Numbers 3:25.
29. The veil in the earthly sanctuary that separates the Holy from the Most Holy Place: Matthew 27:50, Mark 15:37, Luke 23:44, Hebrews 9:3, the veil separating the Holy from the Most Holy Place in the heavenly sanctuary Hebrews 6:19-20, 10:19-21.
30. The LXX (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) and Greek NT uses the following terms for the veil that separated the Holy from the Most Holy Place: Within the veil ἐσώτερον τοῦ καταπετάσματος always refers to the Most Holy Place in Ex 26:33; Lev 16: 2, 12, 15; Hebrews 6:19-20. Outside the veil ἔξωθεν τοῦ καταπετάσματος refers to the Holy Place in Ex 26:35; 27:20-21; Lev. 24:3. In front of the veil ἀπέναντι τοῦ καταπετάσματος refers to the Holy Place: Ex. 30:6; Ex 40:26; before the Lord in front of the veil ἔναντι κυρίου κατὰ τὸ καταπέτασμα τὸ ἅγιον refers to the Holy Place in Lev. 4:5-6, 17; 24:1-3.
31. Most Holy Place ἁγίου τῶν ἁγίων Ex. 26:33; ἅγιον τοῦ ἁγίου Lev. 16:33.
32. The LXX uses εἰς τὸ ἅγιον – in the holy place in Lev. 16:2, 20, 23, 27 to refer to the Most Holy Place.
33. The KJV and NASV use the holy place in Heb. 9:8,12,25; 10:19; 13:11, while the NIV uses the Most Holy Place. 
34. O. R. L. Crosier, “The Law of Moses”, The Day Star Extra, February 7, 1846, vol. 9. See The Shut-door and the Sanctuary: p. 42-44.
35. Apollos Hale, Joseph. Turner, The Advent Mirror, January 1845 vol. 1, no.1. See The Shut-door and the Sanctuary: p. 82.
36. Bliss, “Has the Bridegroom Come?” The Advent Herald, March 5, 1845, vol. 9, no. 4, p. 28
37. See The Shut-door and the Sanctuary: Chapter VII “The Transition from the Shut to the Open Door”.
38. Ellen G. White, “Letter to Bates July 13, 1847” Read why this letter was hidden for so long and what is its significance in Adventist Currents, Volume 1, No. 4 www.hacksplace.com; or The Shut-door and the Sanctuary: Appendix VIII: A-71.
39. Hebrews 1:1-4.
40. Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, Pacific Press, 1911, p. 425. 

---

Wesley Ringer was raised a 5^th generation Seventh-day Adventist, by loving devoted Adventist parents who served ten years in missions with the SDA church in Korea from 1971-1981. After coming to personal faith in Christ in 1970, Wes began a deep study of Scripture, which led him to begin to study New Testament Greek in 1994, and then finally to complete a MA in Applied Linguistics and to take 4 upper division Greek courses in seminary in 2002-04. Since 2005, he has been serving Christ with Wycliffe Bible Translators, as a translation consultant in South Sudan. He has helped with the finishing of 6 New Testaments there. Wes wrote The Shut-door and the Sanctuary: Historical and Theological Problems for the Southern Conference of Seventh-day Adventists on April 6, 1982, revising it in 2011, and again with some small revisions in 2026. It contains all of Ellen White’s published letters and articles from 1844 to 1855 and quotes extensively from both shut-door and open-door Adventist papers from that time period. Contact him to receive this paper at wesleyringer@gmail.com