Berean Bible Corner


The sanctuary in both Old and New Testament of the scriptures is a very precious topic.

In Psalm 77:13 we read  “your way ,O God, is in the sanctuary” (NKJV, if other translation is used will be indicated)   And in Psalm 73:17 where the Psalmist gives expression to his frustrations, we read  until I went into the sanctuary of God then I understood their end.”


The New Testament highlights the sanctuary in Hebr.8:1, 2 this is the main point of the things we are saying; we have such a High Priest……………a minister of the Sanctuary and of the true tabernacle……”  This refers to the heavenly sanctuary. We can be sure that the archenemy of God and Christ, called Satan in the Great Controversy, would do everything possible to obscure the sanctuary, tear it down and wipe it completely from the human mind.


In Old Testament times in particularly during the time of Israel and Judah Satan has done this through the introduction of false worship, Baal idolatry.  Thus we must not be surprised that he will do the same in New Testament times, using his past experience but operating differently.


We also must not be surprised that our living Creator God has used prophets revealing to us how and in which manner Satan would work. This is to be a safeguard for us and keeping our mind clear regarding the understanding of the heavenly sanctuary.

At the same time Satan having knowledge of these prophetic warnings would do everything possible to keep that knowledge away from mankind, and give these prophetic messages a false and misleading interpretation.


We refer in particularly to Daniel 8, a prophetic sanctuary chapter. In the book of Daniel we do find four prophetic parallel lines, each one expanding the other and providing additional information.


Daniel 2 starts with the metallic image. The world would go through four empires followed by the fifth one being the Kingdom of God, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome.  See my study on Revelation 17 regarding Rome, it is the fourth kingdom in different phases.


Daniel 7 takes us through the same four empires by way of beast images, but adding a spiritual power in the form of a little horn coming up from among the ten horns which divided the Roman Empire. This little horn of Daniel 7 is the Papal phase of Rome or the time of the division in ten of the image of Daniel 2, the mingling of church craft and state craft.


Daniel 8, the date is given as the third year of the reign of King Belshazzar which is 551BC according to Dr.Jaques Doukhan and Dr.Mervyn Maxwell. We have in this chapter the kingdoms of Medo-Persia and Greece with a great horn which divides in four, followed also by a little horn which finds its end without any help, ib.8:25 Keep this in mind when you read Dan.11:45 Daniel 8 does not end with the kingdom of God, as Dan.2 and 7, because more additional information is supplied in Dan.9:24-27

Daniel 10-12 is the fourth prophetic line and covers the same ground, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome as Daniel 8.But under different identification, see study on Dan.11:40-45


In this study our main focus is on Daniel 8, as stated before a sanctuary chapter.  Reason for this is found in the fact that instead of wild beasts as images for empires like Medo-Persia and Greece; we have sanctuary animals, a ram and a goat.

The ram with the two horns is explained to be Medo-Persia, ib.8:20. The goat stands for the kingdom of Greece, ib.8:21 and the large horn its first king, ib.8:21, Alexander the Great. The large horn is broken in four, ib.8:22 similar to the four heads of the third beast in Daniel 7 indicating the division of Greece in four parts after the death of Alexander the Great. The fourth kingdom, Rome, Dan.7:23, is not indicated here under the image of a beast, but of a little horn coming up out of one of the four winds of heaven, ib.8:8, 9. Hebrew scholars have made it crystal clear that this little horn is not out of one of the four horns but out of one of the four winds of heaven. For  such readers interested in the technical linguistic arguments of this matter we refer to vl.2 of the D/R Co Series entitled Symposium on Daniel, pp.387-394 One of the concluding statements reads: Thus on the basis of syntax the ‘little horn’ of chapter 8 does not grow out of one of the four horns.”


This little horn of Daniel 8 becomes the fourth kingdom of Daniel 7:23, but as we will see later under two phases, secular and ecclesiastical or political and spiritual, Pagan and Papal Rome as known in secular and church history.

For such readers who think to favour the idea that may be Antiochus IV could be this L.Horn of Daniel 8 we recommend to study Dr.W.H.Shea’s book “Selected Studies on Prophetic Interpretations”, p.25 Here Dr.Shea deals in detail with the question “Why Antiochus IV is not the L. Horn of Daniel 8.”


We briefly mention the following why Antiochus does not qualify for the L. Horn of Daniel 8:

  1. The nature of the L.Horn is a kingdom not a king.
  2. Antiochus never reached exceeding greatness
  3. The activities of the L.Horn do not match activities of Antiochus IV
  4. The time factor does not fit Antiochus IV
  5. The nature of the end of the L.Horn is difficult to match with Antiochus IV
  6. Also the origin of the L.Horn differs from Antiochus IV


We will now put our focus on the activities of the L.Horn of Daniel 8 described in

vs.9-12 and also in vs. 23-25. We list the following from this passage in Daniel 8:

  1. The L.Horn would  become exceedingly great, ib.8:9

This is similar as has been said of the 4th beast in Dan.7:7, 19, and 23

  1. The L.Horn changes from horizontal activities to vertical actions. ib.8:10

actions against God and His people, ib.8:24 This equals Dan.7:25, where

the saints are said to be persecuted. We may find here a transition point from

Pagan to Papal Rome. Both have become guilty of persecution activities, but

the latter more than the former, also in length of time.

  1. The L.Horn  exalts itself to the Prince of the host ib.8:11a.More about this later

The Prince is not a political one. There are two words for Prince, Nagid

political and  sar  here, indicates a heavenly one.(see Shea in his book

Daniel p.180/1). We are dealing with a form of self exaltation.2 Thess.2:4

Similar to what the prophet describes in Isa.14:13, 14 of Lucifer.

4a  The L.Horn will take away the “daily”,(Tamid in Hebrew), ib.8:11b

b  The sanctuary is cast down, trampled underfoot , ib.8:11c and 13b

c. A transgression takes place against the “daily” ib.8:12a

d. The truth is cast down to the ground, ib.8:12

These are all anti sanctuary activities done by Papal Rome and not Pagan Rome. Some of the wordings have created confusion in people’s mind.

First the term   by him………”were taken away”  or   from him……..were taken away” Out of 19 translations I have checked, 12 do read  by him  and 7   from him with the KJV margin reading  from him  Usually a margin indicates the correct translation. In cases of Bible interpretation we do not follow the majority. In Dan.11:31 and 12:11 we read plainly that the “daily” shall be or is taken away.


The late Dr.G.Hasel states that the correct translation is from him was taken away the continuance and also that “grammatically, the nearest and most natural antecedent is

‘the Prince of the Host’. This is supported in the ancient versions” (Symposium on Daniel

D/R Co.Series, vl.2, p.404)

Those who favour “by him” like Uriah Smith say that by him (Papal Rome) the daily

(Pagan Rome)  was taken away ( See Daniel by U.S. p.161) This is what William Miller  and his followers preached before 1844 and what some even today still believe and advocate as the “correct view re the daily”.


If   by him is the correct  reading and the “daily” taken away  is Pagan Rome and the by him refers to the L.Horn – Rome Pagan and Papal, then we have to conclude that the L.Horn took something -the daily- away from itself. Then also we have to conclude that the antecedent “him” the prince of the host should refer to Rome (Pagan and Papal).

Uriah Smith and those today holding to the view that the “daily” refers to Pagan Rome failed and still fail to check the Hebrew word for  “daily”  which is TAMID.

This is what we will do now first


Dr.Angel Rodriguez states (“Symposium on Daniel” D/R series vol.2) that TAMID is “directly related to the Hebrew worship system.”  Ib.p.527 On the same page we find that the expression “was taken away” also has sanctuary links.

Further more on p.528 that the term was intimately linked with the ministry of the priest in the first apartment of the sanctuary .Never used in connection with the second apartment ministry”.

Also on p.529   “The expression, the Tamid, used in this prophecy points to the priestly activity of the Prince of the heavenly sanctuary.”


To be absolutely clear on this matter I did my own research and found this confirmed in various places. I will quote one and give references to the others.

Encyclopaedia Judaic, Jerusalem, 1971 Keter Publ.,House Ltd.

TAMID”. The nineth or tenth tractate of the order  Kodashim  in the Mishna and the Babylonian Talmud.

Tamid is an abbreviated form for olat tamid  (daily burnt-offering) and refers to the daily (morning and evening) sacrifices as set out in Exodus 29:38-42 and Numbers 28:1-8.

(cf 2Kings 16:15; Eze.46:13-15; Neh.10:34 and 2Chron.13:11).

The following is a summary regarding the seven chapters from the same source as above:

Chapter 1. Discusses priestly night watch and preparation for the morning sacrifice.

2. Deals with new fire on the altar

3. Casting lots to determine which priest will serve.

4. Describes the slaughtering of the lamb and preparation for the sacrifice

5. Regarding the priestly prayer and biblical benediction.

6. Offering of incense

7. The performance of the High Priest in the daily services (not the annual one)

These 7 points are from the above mentioned encyclopaedia regarding TAMID.


Other sources for the meaning of TAMID:

The encyclopaedia of Judaism, Macmillan Publ.Co.New York-London.Copy right 1989

Strong’s concordance Hebrew dictionary, p.125, nr.8548

Theological Wordbook of the OT, 1980, Moody Press, p.493 (vol.II, nr.1157a)

Everyman’s Judaic, W.H.Allen, London 1975

The New Standard Jewish Ency. W.H.Allen, London, 1970


I have found further that certain millerite leaders before 1844 changed their view on the “daily” from Pagan Rome to the correct view related to the sanctuary. How do we know?

Let’s first examine a quote from Ellen G.White in “Early Writings” p.74/75:

“I have seen that the 1843 chart was directed by the hand of the Lord, and that it should not be altered;

Then I saw in relation to the “daily” (Dan.8:12) that the word “sacrifice” was supplied by man’s wisdom and does not belong to the text, and that the Lord gave the correct view of it to those who gave the judgment hour cry. When union existed, before 1844, nearly all were united on the correct view of the “daily”; but in the confusion since 1844, other views have been embraced, and darkness and confusion have followed.”

We deduct the following from this statement re the “daily”:

1.She refers to the 1843 prophetic chart

2.She states that nearly all were united re the correct view of the “daily”.

3.But also that because of the confusion after 1844 other views have been embraced.

Point 3 reveals why even today, as said before, some are still holding to other views than the correct one.

Now we have to find the facts regarding the 1843 prophetic chart. The late George McCready Price in his book on Daniel ‘The Greatest of the Prophets’ has a footnote on p.174:

“It may be news to some of my readers that at least some of the leaders in the Millerite movement had the correct view of the meaning of the term ‘daily’. In the Midnight cry, October 4, 1843, this term is understood as meaning Christ’s daily or continual mediation in heaven on behalf of sinners, which was ‘taken away’ by the work of the little horn. The revised chart of 1842, by Charles Fitch and Apollos Hale, omits the identification of ‘paganism’ as the ‘daily’, thus by implication endorsing the correct view. This revised chart is the one which was endorsed (with some qualifications) by Ellen G.White. Crosier’s celebrated article in the ‘Day Star’, 1846, also commended by her, took the position that the sanctuary trodden down by the little horn is in heaven, not on earth, the inevitable inference from this being that the ‘daily’ must also refer to events in heaven………………It was thus that ‘nearly all were united on the correct view of the ‘daily’, as spoken of in Early Writings pp 74/75


I found this footnote by McCready Price confirmed by Dr.L.E.Froom in vol.IV of “Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers” p.737. Discussing the revised chart of 1843 Froom writes:” The ‘daily’ is nowhere identified as paganism, as on former charts, since the majority evidently no longer held with Miller on this. (Fitch, designer of the ‘1843 chart’ had raised the question in his first letter to Miller in 1838, and here omits it from the chart).”


R.W.Schwartz in his book” Light Bearers” to the Remnant pp.397-399 deals with the ‘daily’ showing from history  the confusion in understanding which took place after 1844

and which lasted for several decades.  “By 1919 most of the prominent church leaders had apparently accepted the ‘new view’ of the ‘daily’, although there was still enough discussion to warrant Prescott’s making a detailed defence of the new position. ib.p.399

Schwartz also does mention of L.R.Conradi preparing in 1900 a new interpretation of

Daniel. “He discerned an interpretation of the ‘daily’ much closer to that of Crosier than that of Miller. After checking with Mrs White to see if she had contrary light (she did not) Conradi published his new views. He saw the ‘daily’ as referring to the true sanctuary service carried on under the Christian dispensation by Jesus in heaven, where He served as High Priest. Conradi believed that the papacy had taken this service away by substituting the mass and a system of human priesthood in which the pope had assumed the position of Jesus.” Ib.p.398

I have confirmation of this in my Dutch book on Daniel by L.R.Conradi.pp.174-176.


Secular and church history also reveals and confirms that Papal Rome did not remove Pagan Rome but became its successor in an ecclesiastical form. Papal Rome is a form or phase of the fourth kingdom being Rome, Dan.7:25. When Pagan Rome started to get into decline the star of the bishop of Rome began to rise. By the time the empire of Rome came to its end in 476 AD, Pagan Rome’s government administration was taken over by Papal Rome. The names of the emperors were transferred to the bishop of Rome, who later became Pope of the Roman church. It is stated in history books that when Pagan Rome reached its end in 476AD the church took position of the state and the bishop of Rome the position of the Roman emperor.


The late A.T.Jones in his book ‘The Consecrated Way’ writes on pp.66/67

And all this is confirmed by latter Rome herself. For Leo the Great was pope AD 440-461, in the very time when the former Rome was in its very last days, when it was falling rapidly to ruin. And Leo the Great declared in a sermon that the former Rome was but the promise of the latter Rome, that the glories of the former were to be reproduced in Catholic Rome; that Romulus and Remus  were but the forerunners of Peter and Paul.;

that the successors of Romulus therefore were the precursors of the successors of Peter; and that as the former Rome had ruled the world, so the latter Rome, by the see of the holy blessed Peter as head of the world, would dominate the earth. This conception of Leo’s was never lost from the Papacy.”

This last statement of Jones finds its confirmation in what we have experienced since the

1990’s. Remember also the funeral of the late Pope John Paul II, in 2005


It is now clear what the ‘daily’ stands for. It stands for the daily sanctuary services and ministry in its totality. The first time this was taken away, was under the Pagan Roman empire when they crucified Christ, being the true Lamb of God, John 1:29. Christ died and that moment the vail was rent in twain from top to bottom, Matth.27:51 But the Jewish nation did not understand and in AD70 when Jerusalem was totally destroyed including the temple, all earthly sanctuary services and ministries were completely terminated. In that respect we may apply the ‘taken away of the daily’ as having occurred first under the Pagan Roman Empire, first phase of the L.Horn of Daniel 8. But the more sinister ‘taken away of the daily’ took place under the second phase of the L.Horn, Papal Rome by instituting a worship system in opposition to the heavenly sanctuary


Let’s return to Dan.8:11 we have seen here above how the L.Horn exalted itself. Similar to what the apostle Paul describes in 2Thess.2:4 and what looks like to be the same spirit as in Isa.14:13, 14 It is the Anti (in place of) Christ nature. Certain pope titles are giving clear evidence of this, like Vicar of Christ, Vicarius Filii Dei, Holy Father, Your Holiness etc.


But how did Papal Rome take away the ‘Daily’ (Tamid)?

1.By instituting its own church priesthood on earth.

2.By instituting the mass (394AD)

3.By declaring the mass to be the sacrifice of Christ upon the church altar, daily.

4.By the dogma of transubstantiation (1215AD)

5.By asking to confess to a human priest instead of directly to God

6.By creating other mediators between God and Man, Mary and dead “saints”,

instead of Christ being the only  Mediator between God and man, 1Tim.2:5


In this same manner the place of the Prince’s sanctuary was cast down, Dan.8:11c, from a heavenly sanctuary focus it became an earthly “sanctuary”, church focus religion. Thus the ‘daily’ Tamid, was taken away from the Heavenly Prince.

Then in Dan.8:12a a host was given against the daily by reason of transgression or according to the NEB true religion was thrown to the ground.

New Berkeley translation: it was granted power in opposition to the daily sacrifices; it cast truth to earth…” (Remember ‘sacrifices’ is a supplied word, better to read only ‘daily’ or TAMID)

A new Dutch Bible translation reads that a worship service in opposition to the daily (Tamid) was instituted. That’s what the mass is, a worship service in opposition, rebellious.

In Dan.8:12b we read that the L.Horn cast down the truth to the ground.

Who and what is the truth?

1.Christ is the Truth, John 14:6

2.God’s word is the Truth, John 17:17

3.God’s commandments are Truth, Psalm 119:151

The L.Horn through its Papal Roman phase made itself guilty to all these points.

1.It attacked Christ by taking His place on earth, thus becoming the anti-(in place

of) Christ.

2.It obscured the Word of God, declaring the Bible a forbidden book, especially

during the dark ages. It is not a forbidden book now, but hundreds of years

talk against the Bible has taken away interest for the Bible. Also in Papal

Rome the slogan is still not sola scriptura, but Bible and tradition.

3.It attacked the ten commandments of God, by taking away the second one,

changing the fourth  and making two out of  number ten.


We have confirmation in the book “Great Controversy” by Ellen G.White that Dan.8:12 applies to the second phase of the L.Horn, Papal Rome.

      ‘as foretold by prophecy, the papal power cast down the truth to the ground.’  Ib.65


Briefly we will touch the question raised in Dan.8:13 how long will this situation last?

The answer is given in Dan.8:14 unto two thousand and three hundred days then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.”

It has been established that the termination date for this time period is 1844. The reader has to turn to other studies to get detailed evidence for this date especially regarding the commencing date. See study “1844”.

The word ‘cleansed’ is from the Hebrew word NITSDAQ. This is a complex word having three meanings each one complementing the other; Restoration, Cleansing and Vindication. For this study we will only take the first one, RESTORATION. In the time between about 1832 and 1844 a spiritual global activity took place which matured into the Advent Awakening. Through in depth bible studies the truth of the heavenly sanctuary was rediscovered. A message is going around the globe restoring in people’s mind the truth of the sanctuary which has been trampled into the ground.

1. Christ as the only Mediator between God and man again is given His rightful place.

2. The Ten Commandments are restored as God’s moral code to be kept as a result of

love towards God and Christ ,John 14:15; Rev.22:14 (KJV)

3. The Word of God, the Truth, is being proclaimed worldwide, sola scriptura

A global call is going out calling people to worship the Creator God, in spirit and truth. Rev.14:6, 7; John 4:23 At last the obscured sanctuary is being restored in glory.




Pastor Jan T Knopper

February 2006

Edited May 2009

Re-checked October 2010

Revisited August 2013


Tagged on:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *