In this fifth part, we will address the last two main elements of the prophecy of Daniel 7, which are: the sitting judge and the opened books -suggesting a judgment-; and the saints of the Most High who are supposedly judged, according to our traditional interpretation. To better understand the prophecy of the 1,260 days, we will review what the prophet wrote in verses 21-22, which reveal and explain that from the fourth dreadful and terrible beast would emerge the little horn that would speak great things and make war against the saints and defeat them, UNTIL the Ancient of Days came and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High and the time arrived, and the saints received the kingdom. Verses 25-26 reaffirm the aforementioned, recording that the little horn would speak words against the Most High, and would break the saints of the Most High… and they would be delivered into its hand for a time, times, and half a time, BUT the judge will sit and take away its dominion for it to be destroyed and ruined until the end. At this point, it is important to highlight that the previous verse is the last text of the prophecy of Daniel 7 revealed to the prophet; and we have not found any mention of an investigative judgment of the saints; what we find in verse 22 is that judgment was given to the saints; a verse that the Hebrew Bible records as follows: “Until the Ancient of Days came and judgment was given in FAVOR of the saints of the Most High.” The Peshita Bible, which is a translation of ancient Aramaic texts, translates the same text as follows: “Until the Ancient of Days came and did justice to the saints of the Most High”; who had been unjustly persecuted and oppressed by the little horn for a period of 1,260 days.
We do not find in Daniel 7:22 a judgment to which the saints are exposed, to verify the adequacy of that term; what we do find is a judgment in favor of the people of God and against the little horn, which loses its dominion and majesty over the kingdoms under the whole heaven, which is handed over to the saints; an eternal kingdom that will never be destroyed. Due to the above, our renowned historian George Knight, commenting on Daniel 7 and 8, in his book: The apocalyptic vision and the castration of Adventism, pages 79-81, writes the following: “However, no matter how hard I try, in that passage I do not find any investigative judgment or prior to the advent. What I do find is a judgment of the little horn… verse 22 presents the judgment that is issued in favor of the saints before they receive the kingdom, and verses 26-27 present the judgment against the horn and in favor of the saints, which occurs simultaneously, immediately before they receive dominion… there is no doubt that Daniel 7 presents a prior judgment to the advent in favor of the saints… the tragedy of Adventism is that we made the judgment prior to the advent something… that is not biblical… that is not the teaching of the Bible on judgment. In the Scriptures, the Judge is not against us; not even neutral. The judge is in our favor.’
Roy Adams, former associate director of the Adventist magazine, commenting on Daniel 7, in his book: The sanctuary, pages 115-116, writes the following: “It is clearly seen that in this chapter, the little horn is the main target of judgment… In Daniel 7:22, 25-27, the persecution of God’s people is followed by judgment against their persecutors, and a sentence in their favor”; that is, of the saints. Marvin Moore commenting on Daniel 8:14 and the little horn, in his book: The investigative judgment, page 174, writes the following: “This cleansing of the sanctuary does not seem to have to do with removing the sins of the saints from the sanctuary. It has to do with reversing the infamous deeds of the little horn. If the Sanctuary must be cleansed of some sin, it is the sins of the evil little horn that must be removed, not the sins of the saints”. Moore also acknowledges, on page 220, that our sincere pioneers, having no preparation in biblical languages, formulated mistaken interpretations based on translations of the Bible that did not convey the true sense of the original texts in Hebrew and Aramaic. Despite Moore’s previous categorical and honest statements, unfortunately and inexplicably; Moore writes on page 113 of the same work the following: “… although Daniel does not say it directly, the judgment mentioned in chapter 7 will include a review of the lives of God’s people”. At this point, we must ask ourselves the following question: If Daniel 7 does not say it directly, nor indirectly, as we have confirmed by what we have reviewed: Where does Moore get that this chapter includes a review of the lives of God’s people?
After considering all of the above, we must ask ourselves: Do we find in Daniel 7 an investigative judgment of the saints, when that interpretation is based on conjectures that have no biblical or historical basis? Blessings.”
Comments