As these questions all pertain to the vision of Daniel 8, it will be desirable
to survey the chapter as a whole, in order to have the background for our
position on these related points.
1. A Survey of Chapter 8.—Daniel here gives a consecutive account of the
prophetic symbolism dramatically portrayed before him in vision. But along with
this fact it should be borne in mind that this chapter parallels the vision of
the four-part metallic image of chapter 2, symbolizing four world empires, and
the four beast-kingdoms of Daniel 7, which also portray Babylonia, Medo-Persia,*
Grecia, and Rome
*This compound name is employed in conformity with the angelic interpretation
("Media and Persia," verse 20), and to emphasize the fact that
nor elsewhere does Daniel conceive of an independently existing Median
Empire—a prerequisite to the "Grecian View" of the fourth kingdom
of Daniel 2 and 7, which will be discussed under Question 28. The term "Medo-Persia"
is currently employed by such conservative scholars as Robert D. Culver (1944),
Edward J. Young (1949), Herbert C. Leupold (1949), and the Catholic Commentary
(1955), as well as a large number of earlier men, such as Charles Boutflower
(1922), Charles H. Wright (1906), and a host of great scholars, such as Keil
(1869) and Zockler (1870), and reaching back to Reformation times.
The major difference is that the vision of chapter 8 begins with Medo-Persia.
Daniel first sees a ram with two horns. This is explicitly identified by the
interpreting angel as Medo-Persia, with Persia predominant (compare verses 3,
4, and 20). It pushed, or butted, westward, northward, and southward,
increasing in power and working out its own will.
Next, a shaggy "he goat" came with astonishing speed from the west.
This represented Greco-Macedonia (compare verses 5 and 21), the goat being the
national emblem of Greece, just as the ram was the identifying emblem of Medo-Persia.
The Grecian goat's "notable" horn signified this kingdom under
Alexander the Great (verses 5, 21), whose dominion extended from
Greco-Macedonia to northwestern India, and from Egypt to beyond the Caspian
Sea—the largest empire the world had yet known. There can be no valid
question as to the identification, inasmuch as it is given by inspiration.
Then in 323 B.C., at the height of his power, Alexander died. At first the
leading generals tried to organize the vast territory under regencies in the
name of Alexander's half-witted half brother and Alexander's posthumous son.
But after two decades of intermittent warfare between rivals, the two strongest
bidders for centralized power were decisively defeated
by a coalition of four who divided the empire into four kingdoms. These
divisions (three of which survived as the monarchies of Macedonia, Egypt, and
Syria, until the Romans took over) remarkably fulfilled the prophetic
specifications of four horns toward the four points of the compass—Ptolemy
holding Egypt, Palestine, and part of Syria, toward the south; Cassander ruling
Macedonia and Greece in the west; Lysimachus supreme in Thrace and portions of
Asia Minor, to the north; and Seleucus ruling from Babylonia and Assyria
eastward. See Cambridge Ancient History (1928-38), vol. 6, pp. 462, 482, 483,
492, 498, 499, 502.
Then appeared a horn, out of one of them, distinct from the goat's previous
four horns, one that from littleness became "exceeding great." It was
seen sweeping southward (encompassing Egypt), eastward (absorbing Syria), and
embracing Palestine, the "pleasant land" (verse 9). It took on
amazing proportions. And this, we believe—in harmony with numerous recognized
contemporary, and most past, authorities—symbolized Rome. Rome's pagan and
later papal phases are evidently embraced under the one symbol.
This is further evidenced by the fact that chapter 8 parallels the visions of
chapters 2 and 7—Daniel 2 setting forth the civil side, and Daniel 7
introducing the religious aspect. And in each of these repeating portrayals the
first three world powers—Babylonia, Medo-Persia, and Grecia—were literally
and historically followed by the Roman Empire in its pagan and papal phases.*
The West now became the seat of the empire,
*We are in agreement with Charles Boutflower (In and
Around the Book of Daniel
, p. 193), who says: Daniel's Fourth Kingdom is the Roman power: first
in its earlier stage as a consular and imperial power, and then in its
later stage, when as the 'little horn' it depicted the Papacy."
Adolph Harnack (What Is Christianity? , p. 270), presses the point that, after the Roman Empire's disappearance, the Roman Church, under the Roman
bishop, pushed itself into the place of the Roman World-Empire, of which it is
the actual continuation," simply remodeling its form but governing the
nations with the pope as overlord, and as the successor of Caesar's Pontifex
Gibbon also phrases it well when he suggests that pagan Rome disappeared, only
to reappear as papal Rome. Hundreds of able scholars have held the same
with Italy occupying the central place. We consequently hold that this horn
refers to the greatness and power of Rome.
2. Earthly and Heavenly Sanctuaries Involved.—Because of the striking
parallels between the prophecies of Daniel 2, 7, and 8, and because of
inescapable historical similarity and continuity between the Roman Empire and
the Roman Church, Adventists believe that the "little horn" of Daniel
8:9 represents both pagan and papal Rome.
Accordingly, the activities attributed to this "little horn" in
Daniel 8:10-13, 23-25; 11:31; and 12:11 are to be understood as embracing both
pagan and papal Rome in their scope.
Inasmuch as the 2300 "days," interpreted as years (see section 6),
reach far beyond the time of the earthly sanctuary, we believe they refer to
the "greater and more perfect" heavenly sanctuary, of which the
earthly was the "figure," described in Hebrews 8 and 9. We also
believe that the Hebrew word tamid, the "daily" in the book of Daniel
(chs. 8:11-13 and 11:31), denotes the daily, or continual, services of the
"sanctuary," inasmuch as the word tamid appears in connection with
the sanctuary. We therefore believe that the "sanctuary" of Daniel 8:
11-14 must involve both the earthly and the heavenly sanctuaries. And
the daily regular, or "continual," services of both sanctuaries where
involved. In like manner, the "transgression of desolation" surely
represents the activities of both pagan and papal Rome that render such daily
services inoperative or ineffective. Therefore the question "How long?"
(of verse 13) and the answer "Unto two thousand and three hundred days"
(in verse 14) obviously include both. And by parity of
reasoning, the "host" must include both Jews and Christians, during
the respective parts of the 2300 prophetic days when each sanctuary is
3. Twofold Taking Away of Daily.—It is obvious that the activities of pagan
Rome were concerned primarily with the earthly sanctuary, or Jewish Temple,
while those of papal Rome must concern the heavenly sanctuary. Christ Himself
applies "the abomination that maketh desolate," of Daniel 11:31, to
the desolation of the earthly Temple by the Roman armies in A.D. 70 (Matt.
24:1-3, 15-20; Luke 21:20). But Daniel 11:31 is obviously parallel to Daniel
8:11, 13, as both refer to the sanctuary and its desolation, and to the
"daily," or continual, and its being taken away. Christ thus applies
Daniel 8:13, 14, in part, to the Temple in Jerusalem.
We therefore believe, first, that the taking away of the "daily" by
pagan Rome represents the desolation of the Temple in A.D. 70, with the
permanent cessation of its services (see Dan. 8:11, 13; 11:31; compare Matt.
24:1-3, 15-30; Luke 21:20); and second, that the taking away of the
"daily" by papal Rome represents the introduction of such papal
innovations as a mediating priesthood, the sacrifice of the mass, the
and the worship of Mary,* by which it has successfully taken away
knowledge of, and reliance upon, the continual ministry of Christ in the
heavenly sanctuary, and rendered that ministry inoperative in the lives of
millions of professed Christians. (See Heb. 7: 25; 8:1-5; 9:24; etc.)
4. Rome Fulfills Further Specifications.—This application of the
"exceeding great" horn to Rome is further confirmed by the fact that
Rome fulfilled precisely the other specifications of Daniel 8. For example,
Rome "stamped" upon the people of God (Dan. 8:10), relentlessly
persecuting them throughout the centuries—in pagan times through tyrants,
such as Nero, Domitian, and Diocletian, and just as tragically under the
succeeding papal phase. Moreover, pagan Rome stood up against the Prince of
princes (verse 25), who we believe to be Christ (compare Acts 3:15; Rev. 1:5),
for it was a Roman governor who condemned Jesus, and Roman soldiers who nailed
Him to the cross, pierced His side, and placed a Roman seal on His tomb.
Again, Rome in its later papal form trampled and desecrated the provisions of
God's sanctuary in heaven, by taking away knowledge of, and dependence upon,
Christ's "daily," or continual, ministry as High Priest in the
heavenly sanctuary (Heb. 7:25; 1 John 2:1). It has nullified reliance on the
true atoning sacrifice of Christ on Calvary, once-for-all and all-sufficient,
by substituting and repeating the daily sacrifice of the mass on thousands of
earthly altars. It has thus obscured.
*On page 44 of Bishop Fulton J. Sheen's The Eternal Galilean
1954), appear the words: "Dedicated to Mary Mother of God, Queen of the Seven Swords,
Advocate of Sinners at the Triune Throne, Daughter of the Father. Mother of the
Son, Spouse of the Holy Ghost." (Emphasis supplied).
and mutilated the true worship of God, substituting the compulsory authority
and enforced unity of a visible church for the voluntary and true unity of all
believers in Christ—His mystical body or church. And it has imposed the
authority of the visible pope in place of Christ, who guides and directs His
church by His own designated vicegerent or representative, the Holy Spirit
(John 14:16, 17; 16:7, 13).
Further, as already indicated, the Papacy has interposed the barrier of a human
priesthood between the worshiper and Christ, in place of direct access by all
to Christ our great High Priest. And it has instituted and established a system
of salvation by human works in place of salvation by faith in Jesus Christ
alone, substituting an earthly confessional in place of confession of our sins
directly to Christ in His sanctuary in heaven.
In this way the truth concerning the wondrous provisions of redemption,
centering in the cross, and made effective by our Lord's ministry in the
heavenly sanctuary, were "cast down," as the Papacy loaded truth with
tradition and obscured it by perversion, substituting a system that deprived
humanity of the direct benefits of Christ's atoning sacrifice and priestly
ministry. In this it "practiced and prospered"—practicing its
departures and deceptions, and prospering in its venal schemes and
aggrandizement of power.
5. "Evening-Morning" a full Day.—In the primary, literal sense,
"evening-morning" obviously designated a 24-hour day, for according
to Bible reckoning, each 24-hour day begins at sunset and ends at the following
sunset (Genesis 1). Thus the dark part of the day, designated
"evening," always precedes the light
part of the day, called "morning." And the very fact that in Daniel
8:14 the word for "evening" precedes "morning" inherently
implies the same sequence of night and day, and therefore a full 24-hour day,
not a half day, as some reckon (and thus make the 2300 days equal 1150 days).
If, then, 2300 evenings-mornings meant 2300 days, the period would, if reckoned
as symbolic time in this symbolic prophecy, stand for 2300 literal years.
6. Year-Day Principle Applicable.—On the consistency and propriety of
applying the year-day principle to the 2300 days of verse 14, we would say: In
all symbolic outline prophecies it would appear entirely proper to consider the
accompanying time periods as also symbolic. And a symbol invariably stands for
something other than itself. In the chapter under scrutiny, the prophetic
symbols of nations—portrayed in Daniel 8 by a "ram" and a
"goat"—do not stand for a literal ram and goat, but for the Medo-Persian
Empire and the Grecian kingdom respectively, as declared to Daniel by the angel
in his interpretation. To apply these two obvious symbols to literal animals
would be a palpable denial and repudiation of their symbolic character, and of
the interpretation given by the angel.
Similarly, we believe that in the symbolic time period given in connection
therewith, the 2300 "days" cannot mean 2300 literal days. They must
represent some other time unit in fulfillment. To apply them to that same
number of days—or half days, as some seek to do—would likewise be to
violate and negate their fundamentally symbolic character. Nor are we left in
uncertainty as to the intent of this time feature. The
principle to be followed in interpreting symbolic time is: "I [the Lord]
have given thee a day for a year" (compare Num. 14:34 and Eze. 4:6). We
therefore believe, in harmony with many eminent scholars through the years,*
that the 2300 prophetic "days" indicate 2300 literal years in
fulfillment, and that anything else, and anything less, would be contrary to
the basic principle of time symbolism.
As far back as 1205, an anonymous Joachimite work interpreted the number 2300
as 23 centuries from Daniel's time. Later Villanova recognized the 2300 days as
years by the year-day principle. Then in 1440, Roman Catholic theologian
Nicholas Krebs of Cusa (Conjectures of Cardinal Nicholas von Cusa Concerning
the Last Days), recognized the 2300 prophetic "days" as years, which
he even then dated from Persia. This is one of his remarkable declarations:
In the same way it was opened up to Daniel in what way the last curse would be
after the sanctuary shall be cleansed and the vision fulfilled; and this after
2300 days from the hour of the going forth of the word . . . according to the
predicted number by resolving a day into a year, according to the unfolding
made to Ezekiel [4:5, 6].—Translated from Coniectura in Opera, p. 934
It should be added that the chronological or time placement of the 2300
year-days is not given in chapter 8. We are simply told
that it was yet "for many days"
*E. B. Elliott, for example (Hora Apocalypticaae, 3d ed., vol. 3, pp. 226,
227), refers to "two most remarkable symbolic actions of that prophet
[Ezekiel], which have been so frequently referred to in the year-day
controversy by former commentators. He was on one occasion commanded by God to
lie 390 days on his left side before the people; thereby to typify, in the
symbolic character of their representative, the 390 years of the iniquity and
concomitant debasement on the nation of Israel; on another, to lie 40 days on
his right side, thereby to typify the 40 last years of Judah's iniquity. And
the meaning of these mystical days was declared by God Himself. 'I have laid
upon thee the years of their iniquity, according to the number of the days 390
days. I have appointed thee each day for a year.'—A precedent more clear and
complete than this could scarce be desired; as a probable key and guide to the
meaning of the days in the symbolic visions that we have under
(verse 26), and that the events at its close would occur far beyond Daniel's
time—actually, in the "time of the end" (verse 17). (The dating of
the period will be discussed in Questions 25 and 27.
7. "Daily"—Continual Service of Sanctuary.—Daniel 8:11-14 is
concerned with the sanctuary—its daily services, desolation, and restoration.
The collective word customarily used for the various parts of the daily
services—the offerings, incense, lights, et cetera—is tamid, meaning
"continual" or "regular" (see Ex. 29:42; 30:7, 8; Lev.
24:2). And tamid is the term rendered "daily" in Daniel 8:11, 12, 13;
11:31; and 12:11. In each instance the word "sacrifice" is supplied
by the translators. At first thought, this might not appear to be justified.
But when it is remembered that the evening and morning sacrifices marked the
evening and morning hours of prayer, incense, and sacrifice, it becomes
apparent that the word "sacrifice," while supplied by the
translators, was not altogether inappropriate. Scholars maintain that in
rabbinical literature* both evening and morning sacrifices are similarly
designated by the term tamid, standing alone as in the Hebrew text of Daniel.
In view of these facts, the word "evening" may appropriately be
understood to mean "evening [sacrifice],"
*The Hebrew word tamid, for "continual," in the books of Numbers and
Exodus, is applied to the shewbread, incense, and burnt offering, as well as
specifically to the evening and morning sacrifices. However, in later
rabbinical usage tamid was used almost exclusively for the evening and morning
sacrifices. This is seen in such works as the Talmud—Pesahim 58a, 61a, 63a,
63b, 66b, 73b, 96a; and Sanhedrin 35b and footnote ("By the offering of
the Tamid or daily burnt offering"); Sanhedrin 36a, 44b, 49b, 88b, and
footnote; Zebahiin 91a ("sprinkles the blood of the tamid").
Rabbi III. Hertz, in The Pentateuch and Haftorahs says:
"The daily continual (Heb. tamid) offering was in later times called 'The
Tamid.' Offered throughout the year, it was 'the centre and core of public
worship.' "—On Num. 28:2-8 (Soncino ed., London, 1938), p. 694.
and "morning" to mean "morning [sacrifice],"
which together constituted one complete cycle of the daily,
"regular," or "continual" sanctuary ritual. They are
obviously used to indicate that this is the vision concerning the sanctuary.
Thus when the angel spoke of 2300 "evenings-mornings," Daniel would
naturally understand 2300 tamid units, each made up of an "evening
[sacrifice]" and a "morning [sacrifice]." He would not think of
half of them as "evening" and half as "morning," making but
1150 complete units, or days. Accordingly, the translation "two thousand
and three hundred days" very properly reflects the sense of the Hebrew
construction, and of the context.*
In addition to the foregoing reasons, which are primary, we recognize as
supporting evidence the fact that the Septuagint—the oldest translation of
Daniel—and the Theodotion translation, four centuries later, both place the
word "days" immediately following the
*We are here in agreement with Dr. Edward J. Young, Professor of Old Testament,
Westminster Theological Seminary (The Prophecy of Daniel, 1949, p. 174), who
supports the full-days position:
"It means 2300 days. This interpretation appears in the Greek versions,
Jerome, most Protestant expositors and AV [K.J.V.], and appears to be correct.
. . .
"There is no exegetical support for the position that the phrase
evening-morning means that the evenings and mornings are to be counted
separately, thus 1150 evenings and 1150 days."
Commenting on the paralleling expression "forty days and forty
nights," of Genesis 7:4, 12; Exodus 24:18; and 1 Kings 19:8, Young
contends that it does not mean twenty days and twenty nights. And the three
days and three nights of Jonah 1:17 are not taken as one and one-half days.
Keil states: "We must therefore take the words as they are, i.e.,
understand them of 2300 whole days."—C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Bible
Commentary on the Old Testament. The Book of Daniel the Prophet. p. 304.
Dr. Herbert C. Leopold, Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, Capital University
Seminary (Exposition of Daniel, 1949, p. 354), also holds the 24-hour day
"We have here one of the major cruxes of the whole book: What do the 'two
thousand three hundred evenings-mornings' mean? The compound expression is so
unusual that it perplexes the reader. Besides, in v. 26 the equivalent
expression inserts an 'and' between 'evening and 'morning' and prefixes the
article to each of these words. Consequently v. 26 reads, ha'erebh wehabboger;
v. 14 'erebh boger. Yet both refer to the same period of time. Though we can
cite no Hebrew parallel, the Greek suggests something analogous, namely, the
word nuchthemeron, which means 'a night and a day' (II Cor. 11:25) in the sense
of a period of twenty-four hours. This is the simplest and most feasible interpretation."
2300 "evenings-mornings" to indicate the intent. "Days" is
likewise used in the Vulgate and the Syriac. So also in Luther's German
version. It is likewise the consistent rendering of Jewish expositors in the
Christian Era, as well as of hundreds of early and later Christian exegetes.
The Authorized, or K.J.V., similarly gives "days" in the text,
putting "evenings-mornings" in the margin, but retaining the
"vision of the evening and the morning" in verse 26. Albert Barnes
represents many of the popular commentators when he remarks, "There can be
no doubt, however, that a day is intended by this [an
evening-morning]."—Notes on Daniel, on Dan. 8:14.
8. Vindication at the Heavenly Assize.—In the light of the foregoing, we
believe that the "sanctuary" presented in Daniel 8:11-14 could not
refer alone to the Temple at Jerusalem. The sanctuary to be cleansed at the end
of the 2300 days is, we understand, the sanctuary in heaven, "which the
Lord pitched, and not man" (Heb. 8:2), and of which our triumphant, risen,
and ascended Lord Jesus Christ is the great High Priest (Heb. 8:1). It is that
"temple of God" which the prophet saw in heaven (Rev. 11:19; 15:5).
This, we believe, is the temple that not only is to be "cleansed"
(Dan. 8:14), but is also to be "justified" (margin), "put
right," "vindicated," as will be noted shortly.
The typical services of the earthly sanctuary served as the "example and
shadow of heavenly things" (Heb. 8:5). Now in the wilderness tabernacle
and in the Temple later there were daily and yearly services. And we understand
that the work of Christ, upon His ascension and inauguration as our heavenly
was foreshadowed by the daily service in the earthly type. This was the
phase of His heavenly ministry, mediating and applying the atoning sacrifice He
had completed on the cross.
This daily service of the earthly sanctuary, involving the morning and the
evening sacrifice—the tamid (Hebrew), or "continual "—fitly
foreshadowed the continual efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ our Lord,
accomplished on Calvary's cross. The risen Christ, our ministering high priest,
"ever liveth to make intercession" (Heb. 7:25) for us. Hence we
understand His heavenly ministry to be the mediation of His complete and
ever-efficacious atonement, which He made and completed on the cross for man,
applying that atonement to the individual sinner as he accepts Christ as his
But the annual Day of Atonement service (described in Leviticus 16) typified
the second and final phase of Christ's high priestly ministry, a work involving
judgment. And we believe that we are now living in that time of judgment. It
should be added that, in harmony with the Arminian concept of personal
responsibility to God, our understanding of the Scriptures leads us to believe
that the life record of every individual will be examined, and sentence of
judgment pronounced on every case under review. (This is more fully discussed
in Question 36.)
Not only does this final judgment involve the verdict of all cases before the
bar of God, but it results in the justification of God's character before all
intelligences of the universe. It demonstrates for all eternity the
groundlessness and falsity of Satan's charges against
the character and government and law of God, and the justice and equity of God
in deciding that those who have accepted the provisions of redemption shall
constitute the citizens of His eternal kingdom and that all impenitent sinners
shall be barred. The purpose of the judgment, of course, is not to enlighten
God, but to satisfy forever the minds of all created intelligences, angels and
The universal verdict will be: "Just and true are thy ways, thou King of
saints" (Rev. 15:3); "Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast,
and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus" (Rev. 16:5); and "Even
so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments" (Rev. 16:7).
Thus by the verdicts of the judgment of the heavenly sanctuary will the
character of God be forever vindicated, as the climax of the "hour of his
judgment" (Rev. 14:7).
9. Intent of Term "Cleansed"—The significance of the various terms
used by translators to indicate the full intent of the "cleansing"
(Hebrew, tsadaq) of the heavenly sanctuary (Dan. 8:14) should not be lost.
Eleven different renderings appear in standard translations. These are: (a)
"Cleansed" (Septuagint, Rheims-Douay, Moulton, Boothroyd, Spurrell,
Martin, Vulgate, Harkavy, Ray, Knox, Noyes, French-Osterwald, Segond, and
Lausanne—the K.J.V. and A.R.V.); (b) "be justified" (Leeser;
Sawyer; A.R.V., margin; K.J.V., margin); (c) "be victorious" (Margolis);
(d) "be righted" (Smith-Goodspeed); (e) "[be] declared
right" (Young); (f) "be restored to its rightful state" (R.S.V.);
(g) "be made righteous" (Van Ess); (h) "be restored" (Moffatt);
(i) "be sanctified" (Fenton); (j) "be
vindicated" (Rotheram); and (k) "be consecrated" (Luther). See
Problems in Bible Translation (Review and Herald), pp. 174, 175.
Standard lexicographers agree in rendering tsadaq as "to be just,"
"to be righteous." Gesenius' Lexicon (Brown, Driver, and Briggs
edition) adds, "be put right," or "be put in rightful
condition." And the R.S.V. renders the clause, "Then the sanctuary
shall be restored to its rightful state." The translation "to
cleanse" is evidently borrowed from the Septuagint (katharisthesetai),
followed by the Vulgate (mundabitur). We recognize that the justifying,
vindicating, and making righteous of the Levitical sanctuary was accomplished
by the services on the Day of Atonement, when the sanctuary was cleansed from
all defilement (Lev. 16:16).
This cleansing, however, was definitely included, for in Leviticus 16:16 an
"atonement" was made, in this sense, for the children of Israel
because of their "uncleanness." On that day the "iniquities of
the children of Israel" were removed (verse 21). The antitype of that
service, we believe, will be found in connection with Christ's ministry in the
heavenly sanctuary, and this is apparent from Hebrews 9:23*
It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be
purified [katharizo] with these; but the heavenly things themselves [shall be
purified] with better sacrifices than these [that of the Lamb of God].
*Brooke Foss Westcott (Epistle to the Hebrews, 1892, p. 270) makes this
significant comment on Hebrews 9:23:
"The fact that such a mode of purifying by blood was enjoined for the
material instruments of worship carried with it the inevitable consequence that
some analogous and therefore some nobler purification should be provided for
the divine archetypes." "The whole structure of the sentence requires
that 'cleansed' should be supplied in the second clause from the first."
Such is our understanding of the larger and wider concept of God's great plan
of saving men, as revealed in Daniel 8, for since our Lord's death,
resurrection, and ascension, the heavenly sanctuary is now the center of
Christ's wondrous priestly work of intercession. The sanctuary on earth with
its types and shadows has passed. But in heaven Christ carries out His work of
mediation that culminates in the work of judgment. We therefore conclude that
His mediation embraces both the ministering of Calvary's atoning sacrifice to
every soul who accepts the provisions of His grace, and the ultimate
elimination of sin from the universe of God. Thus this ministry will, we
believe, eventuate in the purgation or destruction of everything connected with
evil—Satan, its author, and his cohorts (Matt. 25:41; Heb. 2:14), death (1
Cor. 15:26), and the works of the devil (1 John 3:8; compare Rev. 20:10, 14).