SDA Doctrines about the year 1844, the Heavenly Sanctuary and Investigative Judgement are Unbiblical

Okay it's rebuttal time. The Year 1844 I already showed you how we figured this out biblically. In Daniel 9:25 God gives a specific starting date. "From the going forth of the order to rebuild Jerusalem" Now I showed you the history in writing but perhaps you want more. In 587-586 BC Jerusalem was destroyed. https://en.wikipedia.org...(587_BC) In 457 BC the Persian king Artaxerxes passed a decree allowing the Jews to return to their homeland and rebuild Jeruselum. (Ezra 7:12-13, https://en.wikipedia.org...) Daniel 9 is believed to be written in 522 BC "In the first year of Darius" so the timing fits. Daniel 9:1 http://www.westminster.edu... Follow the logic: the 70 weeks are "cut off" from the commencement of the 2,300 days because the vision of Daniel 8 begins with the kingdom of the Medes and Persians. Yes of course the year 1844 itself is not biblical, but given the only given start point in the whole prophecy the doctrine itself is biblical. Many well known bible scholars believe that the start of the prophecy mentioned in Daniel 8 even the seventh day Adventist prophet Ellen G White. http://www.whiteestate.org... This is why we believe that our doctrine is biblical. Because the only start date in chapter 9. Whether or not our date is absolutely precise does not matter as we don't worship the date or dwell on it but we know the date was set for a reason and all maybe we didn't get the date right, but our doctrine was based on our interpretation of the bible and therefore our doctrine remains biblical. Stating that we made a misunderstanding on the meaning of "cleansing the temple" does not help your case. That is all your doing. Of course it is a truism that the year 1844 is unbiblical as you will not find that year anywhere in the bible but the doctrine is based on the bible and is therefore biblical. The only time that is mentioned that we don't know is the end of the world as mentioned in Mark 13:32. However cleansing the temple has a different meaning which I'd rather not get into. I have just said that what we believe is biblical. The doctrine that led us to the year 1844 is biblical therefore disproving your claim. The Heavenly Sanctuary We have never claimed that things on earth are the exact way as in heaven. SO you admit to there being a sanctuary in heaven? You are claiming that our doctrine on the heavenly sanctuary says that it is an EXACT COPY but that is not what we are saying. All we are saying is that there is a SANCTUARY IN HEAVEN https://www.adventist.org... in which God dwells and adding the symbolism as seen in the bible Jesus acts as high priest and in the year mentioned in Daniel 8 (which we figure is in 1844) started doing what the high priest would do in the most holy place and go before God and speak for us in investigative judgement. All these things mentioned are found in scripture and therefore are biblical doctrines. (Leviticus 16, Hebrews 2:17, Hebrews 4:14-16, Hebrews 8:1-5, Hebrews 9:11-28, Hebrews 10:19-22, Revelation 8:3-5, Revelation 11:19) For clarification nowhere do we claim things in heaven are exact to the things made on earth. Our doctrine on the heavenly sanctuary is biblical. Investigative Judgement Years are not important. We claim that the year 1844 is biblical and it is using our own interpretation of the bible which therefore proves your resolution wrong. If I felt obligated to I would go into a long spiel of how different people interpret the bible differently but I shouldn't need to to show you that... 1. The year 1844 is found using biblical scripture and the only start date mentioned (Which I showed you) and is therefore biblical. 2. The cleansing of the temple began regardless of what exact year God meant. 3. The temple mentioned is believed to be the heavenly sanctuary mentioned time and time again and is based on biblical references. Now you seem to be saying that "None of this is God's plan" and though that may be true what the issue at hand is, "Are our doctrines based on the bible?" and you will not find one that isn't. It's nice that you think you know God better than us. But I feel the same way towards others and claim that our doctrines are sound because they are biblical. "...so he is able to do so without reading a bunch of books in 1844 until now." Never do we claim that God is up there reading books and I am baffled at how you come to this. Jesus is making testimonies on all of our behalf's and I am surprised that you have taken to mocking our interpretation. For I have shown you multiple verses that show that we do go through a judgement process and Christ acts as our lawyer so to speak. 1 John 1:6 final part. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. Advocate: a person who speaks or writes in support of a cause, person. https://www.google.ca... And nowhere will you find us saying that it takes God 171 years to figure it out. You simply have a misunderstanding of what SDAs believe when it comes to the investigative judgement. What we are saying that God will judge us through Jesus our advocate and according to His requirements. On a sidenote is is written, Acts 17:31 because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead." http://ssnet.org... Now whether the day appointed was in 1844 or whether ti's not the investigative judgement theory is sound based on the multiple texts supporting it. Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil. 2 Corinthians 5:10 "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of the Anointed; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad" Unanswered Questions Answered Well of course I didn't respond to these as round 2 was only for opening arguments. 1. The SDAs did add that day for a year and for a good reason. If you notice in Daniel 9 the day for a year works for finding the year he was baptized, the year he died and the year the Jews officially denied Jesus as the messiah. Even though those days and weeks are interpreted as physical weeks and physical days. Not only that but biblical text supports the day for a year rule. 2.The sacrifice Jesus made as the scapegoat happened according to the prophecy in Daniel 9. In the midst of the week he is to be a sacrifice to end all sacrifice. The prophecy concerning the 2300 days does not fit into this therefore no. The temple was not cleansed yet when Jesus was crucified and the day for a year must then be the cause. 3. The vision of the goat, ram and little horn has nothing to do with what we are discussing. But this is what SDAs claim on the issue. "The "time, times and half a time" (Daniel 7:25) represents for Adventists a period of 1260 years from 538 CE to 1798 CE..." https://en.wikipedia.org... 4. Again our year we figured is based on biblical texts and though may be never proven right it is a biblical based doctrine. The atonement or cleansing of the temple was to take place as we figure in the year 1844. 5. Who knows from what time God is speaking in this. God is above our form of logic and saying that because he said this he couldn't have judged is ridiculous as as I have already said all will come before the lord to be judged. 2 Corinthians 5:10 "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of the Anointed; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad" 6. Yes he knows his sheep, which is why we have an advocate, a defense attorney in Jesus Christ as mentioned in 1 John 1:6. Your verses are in battle with mine and all yours say is that God knows who the good and who the bad are. What mine are saying is that all will come to be judged before the Lord. Yours can work together with mine. The investigative judgement is a biblically sound argument. 2 Corinthians 5:10 In conclusion.... Interesting round. I am glad we can come to know each others religion more thoroughly. I ask that you HOLD OFF on posting your next round since I don't have any internet on the weekend or tomorrow and therefore will not be able to post in time. Again I still hold fast that our beliefs are all based on the bible and with a faith that they are correct. As I have been saying correctness cannot be judged if we go by what the bible says that is correct in our translation.