The Heresy of Dual-Covenant Theology

As using Phil, prince of dim light, your Adventist chery picked mis quotes fail when exposed to the light of truth

1. refuting your nonsensical misquotes

You’ve compiled a list of quotes, primarily from non-magisterial sources like Lucius Ferraris’ Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Alphonsus Liguori’s Dignity and Duties of the Priest, and others, to claim the Catholic Church equates the Pope with God, grants priests divine power, and boasts of changing divine laws. These are classic anti-Catholic tropes, misquoted by Adventists to echo White’s slander of the papacy as Antichrist (The Great Controversy, p. 50). Let’s dismantle each accusation:

Pope as “God on Earth” (Ferraris, Leo XIII, Bellarmine, etc.): Quotes like “The Pope is as it were God on earth” (Ferraris) or “We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty” (Leo XIII) are medieval or rhetorical flourishes, not magisterial doctrine. The Pope is Christ’s vicar (John 21:15-17, Matthew 16:18-19), not God Himself. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 882-883) defines the Pope’s role as Christ’s representative, with authority to teach faith and morals under the Holy Spirit’s guidance (CCC 891), not divine status. These quotes reflect historical hyperbole, not Catholic belief.
Triple Crown and King of Heaven (Ferraris): The papal tiara’s “triple crown” symbolizes the Pope’s roles as priest, prophet, and king in service to Christ, not literal rulership over heaven or hell. Christ alone is King (Revelation 19:16, CCC 786). This is ceremonial language, not doctrine.
Priests as “Creator of Creator” (Liguori): Liguori’s poetic language about priests “creating” Christ in the Eucharist refers to transubstantiation, where bread becomes Christ’s body through God’s power (John 6:53-56, CCC 1374-1376). Priests act in persona Christi (CCC 1348), not as divine creators. This is sacramental theology, not blasphemy.
Priests Forgiving Sins (Liguori, Catholic Encyclopedia): Priests administer Christ’s forgiveness in confession (John 20:22-23: “If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven”), not their own power (CCC 1441-1442). Your claim that priests rival Christ is a lie—Christ delegates this authority.
Church Changing Sabbath (Mosna, Canon and Tradition): You cite sources claiming the Church changed the Sabbath to Sunday by its own authority. Sunday worship began with the apostles (Acts 20:7, 1 Corinthians 16:2), not a papal decree. Early Christians, like Ignatius of Antioch (Letter to the Magnesians, c. 110 AD, Ch. 9), worshipped on Sunday to honor Christ’s resurrection. The Church, with Christ’s authority (Matthew 16:18-19), upholds Sunday as fulfilling the Sabbath (Colossians 2:16-17, CCC 2174-2176). No verse ties Sunday to Daniel 7:25’s “times and laws.”
Infallibility (Leo XIII, Leist): The Pope’s infallibility is limited to defining faith and morals ex cathedra (CCC 891), guided by the Holy Spirit (John 16:13), not equating him with God. This preserves the Gospel, unlike White’s fallible visions.
Church Never Erring (Gregory VII): Gregory’s claim reflects confidence in the Church’s divine guidance (Matthew 16:18), not literal perfection. The Church’s doctrines endure, not human actions.

Your Dishonesty: These quotes, from non-authoritative sources or taken out of context, don’t reflect Catholic doctrine. The Catechism (CCC 880-892) clarifies the Pope’s role as Christ’s vicar, not God. Your misrepresentations are Adventist lies, Phil, not truth.

2. Adventism’s Satanic Evils: A Cult of Lies

Phil, your accusations echo Ellen G. White’s anti-Catholic venom, branding the Church as Antichrist (The Great Controversy, p. 50). Seventh-day Adventism is a satanic cult, built on her false prophecies and heretical doctrines. Let’s expose its evils:

Adventist Error	Details	Biblical Refutation
False Prophecies	White’s 1856, 1844, 1845 predictions failed (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, p. 131-132; A Word to the Little Flock, p. 14).	Deuteronomy 18:22: False prophets fail.
Investigative Judgment	White’s 1844 doctrine denies Christ’s atonement (The Great Controversy, p. 421-422).	Hebrews 9:12: Christ’s work is complete.
Sabbath Idolatry	White’s salvific Sabbath lacks New Testament support (The Great Controversy, p. 605-612).	Colossians 2:16-17; Romans 14:5-6.
Anti-Catholic Hatred	White calls the Church Babylon (The Great Controversy, p. 50).	Matthew 16:18-19: Christ’s Church endures.
Plagiarism	White stole from authors (The White Lie by Walter Rea).	Revelation 22:18-19: Don’t add to Scripture.

Adventism’s lies make it a demonic cult, not God’s remnant. Your “blasphemy” charge is White’s garbage, not truth.

3. What's the truth? Christ’s Church , the Catholic Church Prevails

The Catholic Church, founded by Christ (Matthew 16:18-19), is His bride (Ephesians 5:25-27), not a blasphemous Antichrist. We worship Christ through the Eucharist (John 6:53-56, CCC 1324-1327), fulfilling the Sabbath on Sunday (Acts 20:7, CCC 2174-2176). The Pope and priests serve Christ’s mediation (John 20:22-23, CCC 1441-1442), not usurp it. Your misquoted sources are rhetorical exaggerations, not doctrine. The Church upholds God’s moral law (Matthew 22:37-40, CCC 2055), not White’s legalistic rituals.

Conclusion: Adventism lies, continually,

Phil, your “blasphemy” accusations are Adventist lies, rooted in Ellen G. White’s satanic distortions. Your cherry-picked quotes misrepresent Catholic teaching, and your Sabbath obsession lacks New Testament support (Colossians 2:16-17). Adventism’s evils—White’s false prophecies, Investigative Judgment heresy, Sabbath idolatry, and anti-Catholic venom—mark it as a demonic cult. Produce one verse naming the papacy as Antichrist or mandating Saturday worship. You can’t, because your theology is White’s trash. Repent and flee to Christ’s Church (Ephesians 2:8-9). Stay in your cult, and you risk Revelation 21:8’s fate.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I understand your concern that Catholic practices might seem to suggest multiple mediators besides Jesus Christ. However, I’d like to clarify that the Catholic Church fully affirms that Jesus Christ is the sole mediator between God and humanity, as taught in Scripture, the Catechism, and Church tradition. Let me address your points about priests, popes, Mary, the intercession of the departed, and our direct connection to Jesus, showing how Catholic belief and practice align with Christ’s unique mediation.

1. Jesus Christ: The Sole Mediator

The Catholic Church teaches, in line with 1 Timothy 2:5, that “there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” This is foundational to our faith.

Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 618): “Christ is the one mediator... He is the only one who reconciles us with the Father.”

Any role of priests, popes, or Mary is subordinate to Christ’s unique mediation, as I’ll explain below.

2. The Roles of Priests, Popes, and Mary

You mentioned that priests, popes, and Mary have “no powers than the common man.” The Catholic Church agrees they do not have divine powers or mediate salvation like Christ. Their roles are distinct and serve to point us to Jesus.

Role	Catholic Teaching	Biblical Basis	Historical Evidence
Priests	Priests act in persona Christi to administer sacraments, not as mediators of salvation but as instruments of Christ’s grace.	John 20:22-23: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven.”	Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 AD): The Eucharist is valid only under the bishop or his delegate.
Popes	The pope, as Peter’s successor, guides the Church in unity, not as a mediator but as a servant of Christ’s mission.	Matthew 16:18-19: “You are Peter... I will give you the keys of the kingdom.”	Clement of Rome (c. 96 AD): Intervened to maintain Church unity.
Mary	Mary intercedes as the Mother of God, always pointing to Christ, not mediating salvation herself.	John 2:5: “Do whatever he tells you.”	Council of Ephesus (431 AD): Affirmed Mary as Theotokos, emphasizing her role in salvation history.

CCC 969: Mary’s intercession is “subordinate to Christ’s mediation” and exists to bring us closer to Him.

These roles do not rival Christ but reflect His work through the Church, His Body.

3. Can the Departed See or Hear Us?

You stated that “the departed do not see nor hear us.” Catholic teaching, rooted in Scripture and tradition, holds that the saints in heaven, united with Christ, are aware of our prayers and can intercede for us, not as mediators but as prayerful members of the Church.

Revelation 5:8: “The twenty-four elders... [hold] golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.”
Hebrews 12:1: “We are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses.”
Origen (c. 248 AD): “The souls of the saints who have fallen asleep” pray for us.
Early Christian catacomb inscriptions (3rd-4th centuries): “Pray for us,” addressed to martyrs.

CCC 2683: The saints “share in the living tradition of prayer... by their intercession.”

Their intercession is like asking a friend to pray for you—effective but dependent on Christ’s mediation.

4. Direct Connection to Jesus Christ

I agree that we have a direct connection to Jesus, as He said, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me” (John 14:6). Catholics believe this wholeheartedly. Asking for the saints’ intercession does not deny this but reflects our unity as the Body of Christ.

1 Timothy 2:1-2: Paul urges intercessory prayers for all, showing that asking others to pray is biblical.
James 5:16: “The prayer of a righteous man has great power.” The saints, perfected in heaven, pray powerfully for us.

CCC 957: Communion with the saints “does not weaken, but strengthens, our worship of God alone.”

Just as you might ask a pastor to pray for you, we ask the saints, who are closer to Christ, to join us in prayer.

5. Catholic Practice vs. Theology

I hear your concern that Catholic practices might seem far from Christ’s sole mediation. Some devotions, like the Rosary or venerating saints, can appear to elevate others above Jesus, especially in certain cultural expressions. However, the Church teaches that all devotions lead to Christ.

CCC 971: Devotion to Mary is “intrinsic to Christian worship” because it points to Christ.

The Council of Trent (1563) corrected abuses, clarifying that veneration of saints or images is not worship but a way to honor God. The Mass, the heart of Catholic worship, is entirely focused on Christ’s sacrifice (CCC 1346).

If some practices seem excessive, they reflect human expressions of faith, not the Church’s official teaching, which always upholds Christ as the sole mediator.

Conclusion

Caww, I hope this clarifies that Catholics share your belief in Jesus as the sole mediator, as taught in 1 Timothy 2:5. Priests, popes, and Mary serve in roles that support, not rival, Christ’s mediation. The saints’ intercession, biblically and historically rooted, enhances our direct connection to Jesus within the communion of the Church. If you’ve seen practices that seem to stray from this, they don’t reflect Catholic doctrine, which centers on Christ alone. I’d love to discuss further if you have questions!

The Seventh Day Adventist Investigative Judgment contradicts Scripture’s clear teaching on Christ’s completed atonement and judgment

Hebrews 9:12: “He entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption.” This states Christ’s sacrifice at Calvary (c. 33 AD) fully atoned for sins, entering the heavenly sanctuary at His ascension, not 1844. White’s claim that Christ began this work in 1844 (*The Great Controversy*, p. 421-422) denies His finished work (John 19:30: “It is finished”), a satanic lie.
Hebrews 10:10-14: “We have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all… by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.” This refutes a 1844 investigative process, affirming Christ’s single, perfect sacrifice. White’s ongoing judgment undermines this, suggesting His work was incomplete.
John 5:24: “Whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged.” Believers are judged at conversion, not in a 1844 review. Adventism’s delay contradicts Christ’s promise.
1 John 2:1-2: “If anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One… He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins.” Christ’s advocacy is immediate, not contingent on a 1844 investigation. White’s doctrine adds a human works element, violating Galatians 2:16.
Daniel 8:14 Misuse: White ties the Investigative Judgment to Daniel 8:14’s “2300 evenings and mornings,” interpreted as 2300 years ending in 1844. This is baseless. The text refers to Antiochus IV’s Temple desecration (167-164 BC, 1 Maccabees 1:41-54, 4:52-56), a literal 2300 days, not years. Ezekiel 4:6’s day-for-year principle is symbolic, not universal, and Daniel 8:26 calls it a “vision,” not a prophetic timeline.

Your doctrine is unbiblical, Phil, denying Christ’s completed redemption for White’s 1844 fantasy.

The SDA false Investigative Judgment’s origins has fraudulent roots

1844 Great Disappointment: White’s doctrine emerged after William Miller’s failed prediction of Christ’s return on October 22, 1844. To salvage this flop, Hiram Edson claimed a vision of Christ entering the heavenly sanctuary, which White later adopted (*Early Writings*, p. 54-56). This is a post-hoc invention, not divine revelation, born of human error.
Early Christian Silence: No early Church Father (e.g., Augustine, Chrysostom) or Reformation theologian (e.g., Luther, Calvin) taught a 1844 investigative judgment. The concept is absent from Christian tradition until Adventism’s 19th-century desperation, contrasting with the Church’s consistent view of Christ’s immediate intercession (Hebrews 7:25).
Adventist Revisionism: White’s writings, revered as divine (SDA Belief #18), contradict historical Christian eschatology. The Council of Nicaea (325 AD) and later councils focused on Christ’s divinity and resurrection, not a 1844 judgment. Your doctrine is a modern cultic aberration, Phil, not apostolic truth.

Your historical claim is a lie, forged to prop up White’s failed prophecy, not God’s Word.

The linguistic basis for the Investigative Judgment collapses under scrutiny

“2300 Evenings and Mornings” (Daniel 8:14): The Hebrew term *ereb boqer* (“evenings and mornings”) typically denotes literal days (e.g., Genesis 1:5). The Septuagint and Theodotion translate it as “days,” aligning with Antiochus’ 2300-day Temple desecration (167-164 BC). Adventism’s day-for-year interpretation, based on Ezekiel 4:6, is a forced analogy, not a linguistic norm. Daniel 8:26’s “vision” (Hebrew: *chazon*) suggests a symbolic timeframe, not a prophetic era.
“Cleansing of the Sanctuary”: The Hebrew *taher* (“to cleanse”) in Daniel 8:14 refers to the Temple’s purification after Antiochus’ defilement (1 Maccabees 4:36-59). Adventism reinterprets this as a heavenly judgment, but no linguistic evidence in Daniel supports a shift from earthly to celestial context. The Greek *katharismos* in the Septuagint reinforces a physical cleansing, not a 1844 audit.
Daniel 9:24-27 Link: You imply the 70 weeks (490 years) connect to the 2300 days, but Daniel 9:23 specifies Gabriel’s message as “insight and understanding” for the 70 weeks, not an explanation of Daniel 8. The Aramaic and Hebrew lack any textual bridge, making your 1844 timeline a linguistic fabrication.

Your linguistic gymnastics, Phil, are a desperate stretch to justify White’s 1844 lie, not biblical exegesis.

The Investigative Judgment’s logic is riddled with contradictions and absurdities

Redundant Judgment: If Christ judges believers’ works from 1844 to determine salvation, why judge again at the Second Coming (Matthew 25:31-46, Revelation 20:11-15)? This duplicates judgment, implying God’s omniscience is flawed—logically absurd.
Delayed Atonement: White’s claim that Christ’s atonement began in 1844 contradicts His immediate intercession (Hebrews 7:25). If sins weren’t atoned until 1844, how were Old Testament saints saved (Hebrews 9:15)? Your doctrine delays redemption, defying Christ’s finished work (John 19:30).
1844 Date Fabrication: The 2300-year timeline (457 BC to 1844 AD) relies on Artaxerxes’ decree (Ezra 7:11-26), but historical dates vary (e.g., 458 or 445 BC). Adjusting for zero-year transition, 1844 lacks precision, exposing White’s post-hoc adjustment after the Great Disappointment as a logical fudge.
Human Works Salvation: The Investigative Judgment bases salvation on post-1844 obedience, adding works to faith (Galatians 2:16). This contradicts Scripture’s grace-alone doctrine (Ephesians 2:8-9), making God’s judgment arbitrary and human effort decisive—logically incoherent.

Your logic, Phil, is a house of cards, built on White’s desperation, not divine reason.

Adventism’s Satanic Evils: A Cult of Lies

Phil, your Investigative Judgment obsession stems from Seventh-day Adventism’s demonic core, built on Ellen G. White’s lies. Let’s expose your cult’s evils:

Adventist Error	Details	Biblical Refutation
False Prophecies	White’s 1856, 1844, 1845 failures (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, p. 131-132).	Deuteronomy 18:22
Investigative Judgment	Denies Christ’s atonement (The Great Controversy, p. 421-422).	Hebrews 9:12
Sabbath Idolatry	Salvific Sabbath lacks support (The Great Controversy, p. 605-612).	Colossians 2:16-17
Anti-Catholic Hatred	White’s Babylon claim (The Great Controversy, p. 50).	Matthew 16:18-19
Plagiarism	White stole from authors (The White Lie by Walter Rea).	Revelation 22:18-19

Adventism is a satanic cult, chaining you to White’s lies and a works-based gospel.

And you can't provide any proof for the Adventist teaching of Investigative Judgement.

you know why?

because the Adventist belief iof the Investigative Judgement is Biblically, historically, linguistically, and logically FALSE, just like Adventism is false

The Investigative Judgment contradicts Scripture’s clear teaching on Christ’s completed atonement and judgment:

Hebrews 9:12: “He entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption.” This states Christ’s sacrifice at Calvary (c. 33 AD) fully atoned for sins, entering the heavenly sanctuary at His ascension, not 1844. White’s claim that Christ began this work in 1844 (*The Great Controversy*, p. 421-422) denies His finished work (John 19:30: “It is finished”), a satanic lie.
Hebrews 10:10-14: “We have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all… by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.” This refutes a 1844 investigative process, affirming Christ’s single, perfect sacrifice. White’s ongoing judgment undermines this, suggesting His work was incomplete.
John 5:24: “Whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged.” Believers are judged at conversion, not in a 1844 review. Adventism’s delay contradicts Christ’s promise.
1 John 2:1-2: “If anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One… He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins.” Christ’s advocacy is immediate, not contingent on a 1844 investigation. White’s doctrine adds a human works element, violating Galatians 2:16.
Daniel 8:14 Misuse: White ties the Investigative Judgment to Daniel 8:14’s “2300 evenings and mornings,” interpreted as 2300 years ending in 1844. This is baseless. The text refers to Antiochus IV’s Temple desecration (167-164 BC, 1 Maccabees 1:41-54, 4:52-56), a literal 2300 days, not years. Ezekiel 4:6’s day-for-year principle is symbolic, not universal, and Daniel 8:26 calls it a “vision,” not a prophetic timeline.

Your doctrine is unbiblical, Phil, denying Christ’s completed redemption for White’s 1844 fantasy.

The Investigative Judgment’s origins expose its fraudulent roots:

1844 Great Disappointment: White’s doctrine emerged after William Miller’s failed prediction of Christ’s return on October 22, 1844. To salvage this flop, Hiram Edson claimed a vision of Christ entering the heavenly sanctuary, which White later adopted (*Early Writings*, p. 54-56). This is a post-hoc invention, not divine revelation, born of human error.
Early Christian Silence: No early Church Father (e.g., Augustine, Chrysostom) or Reformation theologian (e.g., Luther, Calvin) taught a 1844 investigative judgment. The concept is absent from Christian tradition until Adventism’s 19th-century desperation, contrasting with the Church’s consistent view of Christ’s immediate intercession (Hebrews 7:25).
Adventist Revisionism: White’s writings, revered as divine (SDA Belief #18), contradict historical Christian eschatology. The Council of Nicaea (325 AD) and later councils focused on Christ’s divinity and resurrection, not a 1844 judgment. Your doctrine is a modern cultic aberration, Phil, not apostolic truth.

Your historical claim is a lie, forged to prop up White’s failed prophecy, not God’s Word.

The linguistic basis for the Investigative Judgment collapses under scrutiny:

“2300 Evenings and Mornings” (Daniel 8:14): The Hebrew term *ereb boqer* (“evenings and mornings”) typically denotes literal days (e.g., Genesis 1:5). The Septuagint and Theodotion translate it as “days,” aligning with Antiochus’ 2300-day Temple desecration (167-164 BC). Adventism’s day-for-year interpretation, based on Ezekiel 4:6, is a forced analogy, not a linguistic norm. Daniel 8:26’s “vision” (Hebrew: *chazon*) suggests a symbolic timeframe, not a prophetic era.
“Cleansing of the Sanctuary”: The Hebrew *taher* (“to cleanse”) in Daniel 8:14 refers to the Temple’s purification after Antiochus’ defilement (1 Maccabees 4:36-59). Adventism reinterprets this as a heavenly judgment, but no linguistic evidence in Daniel supports a shift from earthly to celestial context. The Greek *katharismos* in the Septuagint reinforces a physical cleansing, not a 1844 audit.
Daniel 9:24-27 Link: You imply the 70 weeks (490 years) connect to the 2300 days, but Daniel 9:23 specifies Gabriel’s message as “insight and understanding” for the 70 weeks, not an explanation of Daniel 8. The Aramaic and Hebrew lack any textual bridge, making your 1844 timeline a linguistic fabrication.

Your linguistic gymnastics, Phil, are a desperate stretch to justify White’s 1844 lie, not biblical exegesis.

The Investigative Judgment’s logic is riddled with contradictions and absurdities:

Redundant Judgment: If Christ judges believers’ works from 1844 to determine salvation, why judge again at the Second Coming (Matthew 25:31-46, Revelation 20:11-15)? This duplicates judgment, implying God’s omniscience is flawed—logically absurd.
Delayed Atonement: White’s claim that Christ’s atonement began in 1844 contradicts His immediate intercession (Hebrews 7:25). If sins weren’t atoned until 1844, how were Old Testament saints saved (Hebrews 9:15)? Your doctrine delays redemption, defying Christ’s finished work (John 19:30).
1844 Date Fabrication: The 2300-year timeline (457 BC to 1844 AD) relies on Artaxerxes’ decree (Ezra 7:11-26), but historical dates vary (e.g., 458 or 445 BC). Adjusting for zero-year transition, 1844 lacks precision, exposing White’s post-hoc adjustment after the Great Disappointment as a logical fudge.
Human Works Salvation: The Investigative Judgment bases salvation on post-1844 obedience, adding works to faith (Galatians 2:16). This contradicts Scripture’s grace-alone doctrine (Ephesians 2:8-9), making God’s judgment arbitrary and human effort decisive—logically incoherent.

Your logic, Phil, is a house of cards, built on White’s desperation, not divine reason. seventh day Adventism is a Satanic, false religion created by a false prophetess with numerous failed prophecies

——Daniel 9:24-27 Link: You imply the 70 weeks (490 years) connect to the 2300 days, but Daniel 9:23 specifies Gabriel’s message as “insight and understanding” for the 70 weeks, not an explanation of Daniel 8. The Aramaic and Hebrew lack any textual bridge, making your 1844 timeline a linguistic fabrication.

THEREFORE, CONSIDER THE WORD AND UNDERSTAND THE VISION:

There are no Jesuit lies that can explain away the fact that Daniel’s 70 week prophecy revelation by Gabriel comes out of the longer 2300 YEAR prophecy time period (distant future). Daniel didn’t understand the 2300 day/YEAR prophecy from Daniel 8. Gabriel shows up in Daniel 9, as Daniel is praying, to EXPLAIN it and help him to understand.

Dan 8:26“The vision of the evenings and mornings that has been given you is true, but seal up the vision, for it concerns the distant future.” 27I, Daniel, was worn out. I lay exhausted for several days. Then I got up and went about the king’s business. I was appalled by the vision; it was beyond understanding.

Daniel 9:20While I was speaking and praying, confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel and making my request to the Lord my God for his holy hill— 21while I was still in prayer, Gabriel, the man I had seen in the earlier vision, came to me in swift flight about the time of the evening sacrifice. 22He instructed me and said to me, “Daniel, I have now come to give you insight and understanding. 23As soon as you began to pray, a word went out, which I have come to tell you, for you are highly esteemed. THEREFORE, CONSIDER THE WORD AND UNDERSTAND THE VISION:

The vision Gabriel is referring to is the 2300 day/year vision. None of your Jesuit linguistic trickery can explain that truth away. Daniel’s 70 weeks is 490 literal years. Since that is the case, the 2300 days MUST BE YEARS AS WELL.

Therefore, Antiochus cannot be the Little Horn.

The Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon, Little Horn, Antichrist power, Son of Perdition, Man of Sin, and the first beast of Revelation 13. Every Protestant Reformer knew it, from the bible, backed by history. Jesuits came up with Preterism and Futurism to deflect these true Reformation accusations.

And you try to convince people that Daniel’s 70 week prophecy (490 literal years) was delivered to Daniel, by Gabriel, IN A SECOND, LINGUISTIC VISION, so your Jesuit 2300 literal day/Antiochus is the Little horn of Daniel HOAX seems plausible.

NO SALE, JESUIT.

Phil, Prince of Dim Light, your Adventist tirade, clinging to Ellen G. White’s demonic distortion of Daniel 8:14’s 2300 days and 9:24’s 70 weeks to prop up your 1844 Investigative Judgment and anti-Catholic conspiracy, is a pathetic house of cards ready to collapse. You accuse me of “Jesuit lies” and a “2300 literal day/Antiochus hoax,” while branding the Catholic Church as the “whore of Babylon” and “Little Horn,” parroting White’s The Great Controversy (p. 50). Your theology is a rotting pile of Adventist garbage, built on false prophecy and historical revisionism. Let me give you a detailed, comprehensive, total demolition of your points—point by point—using Biblical evidence, historical context, linguistic analysis, and logical reasoning, exposing Seventh-day Adventism’s satanic cult and demanding you flee its lies for Christ’s true Church

1. Biblical proof that Adventism is wrong

Your claim that Daniel 9’s 70-week prophecy “comes out of” the 2300-day prophecy and must be years, ruling out Antiochus, is a White-inspired fantasy, not Scripture. Let’s shred it:

Daniel 8:14 and 9:24-27 Disconnection: You assert the 70 weeks (Daniel 9:24-27) explain the 2300-day prophecy (Daniel 8:14). Wrong. Daniel 9:2 shows Daniel praying about Jeremiah’s 70-year exile (Jeremiah 25:11-12), not pondering Daniel 8. Gabriel’s message (9:23) gives “insight and understanding” for the 70 weeks—490 years tied to the Messiah’s coming and Jerusalem’s fall (9:26, c. 33-70 AD)—not an explanation of the 2300 days. No verse links the two; your connection is a fabrication.
Timeframes: Daniel 8:14’s “2300 evenings and mornings” (Hebrew: *ereb boqer*) denotes literal days, matching Antiochus IV’s 2300-day Temple desecration (167-164 BC, 1 Maccabees 1:41-54, 4:52-56). The 70 weeks (70 x 7 = 490 years) align with Christ’s ministry and Jerusalem’s destruction (Daniel 9:26), not a 2300-year span to 1844. Your day-for-year principle, from Ezekiel 4:6, is a symbolic exception, not a Danielic rule—Daniel uses literal days elsewhere (10:13).
Little Horn Identity: Daniel 8:21-22 ties the Little Horn to Greece, fitting Antiochus, who persecuted Jews and defiled the Temple. Daniel 7’s Little Horn, from the fourth beast (Rome), suits Nero (64-68 AD) or a future figure, not the papacy, which preserved orthodoxy (e.g., Nicaea, 325 AD). No verse names the papacy as Antichrist—your claim is White’s lie.
Revelation’s Beasts: Revelation 13’s first beast and 17’s “whore of Babylon” symbolize Rome or apostate systems, not the Catholic Church, founded by Christ (Matthew 16:18-19). Your conflation is Adventist fiction.
“Linguistic Vision” Mischaracterization: You mock a “second, linguistic vision” for Daniel 9, but 9:21-23 describes Gabriel speaking directly, not a symbolic vision like Daniel 8’s beasts. The 70 weeks are a clear prophecy, not a rehash of 8:14. Your dismissal is a strawman, Phil, not a refutation.

Your biblical case is a White-driven delusion, not God’s Word.

2. Historical proof for the errors and falseness of Adventism

Your claim that “every Protestant Reformer knew” the papacy was the Antichrist, deflected by Jesuit Preterism and Futurism, is a historical sham:

Reformation Context: Reformers like Luther and Calvin labeled the papacy the Antichrist amid 16th-century corruption (e.g., indulgences), but this was polemical rhetoric, not prophetic exegesis. They rejected Adventism’s Sabbath and 1844 judgment—Luther kept Sunday worship. Your appeal to their legacy is a distortion.
Jesuit Eschatology: Preterism (Antichrist as Nero) and Futurism (future Antichrist) predate Jesuits—e.g., Irenaeus (*Against Heresies*, c. 180 AD) leaned Futurist. Jesuit Francisco Ribera (1590) developed Futurism to counter Protestant historicism, but this was one view among many. Early Fathers like Hippolytus (*Treatise on Christ and Antichrist*) linked Daniel’s Little Horn to Antiochus or a future figure, never the papacy.
Adventist Revisionism: White’s 1844 Investigative Judgment (*The Great Controversy*, p. 421-422) and anti-Catholic narrative emerged post-Millerite flop (1844), not from Reformation theology. Her day-year principle, borrowed from William Miller, contradicts Jewish and early Christian exegesis of Daniel’s literal days (e.g., Jerome, *Commentary on Daniel*). The Great Disappointment forced this invention, not divine revelation.

Your "history", Phil, is a lie, forged by White to vilify the Church, not reflect truth.

3. Linguistic proof of the Adventist errors

Your linguistic leap from 2300 days to 2300 years unravels under scrutiny:

“Evenings and Mornings” (Daniel 8:14): The Hebrew *ereb boqer* (“evenings and mornings”) mirrors Genesis 1:5’s daily cycle, suggesting literal days. The Septuagint and Theodotion render it “days,” aligning with Antiochus’ 2300-day persecution (167-164 BC). Your day-for-year principle, from Ezekiel 4:6, is a symbolic exception, not a Danielic norm—Daniel 12:11-12 uses literal days for end-time events.
“Seal Up the Vision” (Daniel 8:26): The Hebrew *chatham* (“seal up”) indicates the vision’s obscurity due to its future fulfillment (e.g., Antiochus or a later figure), not a 2300-year delay to 1844. Daniel 12:4 uses similar language for end-times, but 8:14’s context is Hellenistic, not eschatological.
Gabriel’s Instruction (Daniel 9:22-23): Gabriel’s “insight and understanding” (Hebrew: *bin* and *sakal*) targets the 70 weeks, not the 2300 days. The phrase “consider the word and understand the vision” (9:23) refers to the 70-week prophecy, not a rehash of 8:14. The Aramaic and Hebrew lack any textual bridge—your “explanation” is a forced leap.
“Distant Future” Misuse: Daniel 8:26’s “distant future” (Hebrew: *acharit hayyamim*) applies to events beyond Daniel’s time (e.g., Antiochus or Rome), not a specific 1844 date. Your fixation on this is a White-driven distortion.

Your linguistic trickery, Phil, is White’s invention, not biblical exegesis.

4. Logically Adventism fails as well

Your argument’s logic is a tangled mess of contradictions:

70 Weeks and 2300 Days Link: If the 70 weeks explain the 2300 days, why no textual overlap? Daniel 9:24’s focus on the Messiah and Jerusalem contradicts 8:14’s sanctuary cleansing. Your assumption that both must be years, because 70 weeks are 490 years, is circular—lacking evidence for the 2300-day duration.
Antiochus Exclusion: Daniel 8:21-22 ties the Little Horn to Greece, fitting Antiochus’ persecution (1 Maccabees 1:41-49). Your rejection based on a 2300-year timeline is circular logic, presupposing White’s 1844 date without proof. Antiochus’ 2300-day rule (167-164 BC) matches 8:14’s text.
Papal Antichrist Contradiction: The papacy, rooted in Peter (Matthew 16:18-19), preserved Christian doctrine (e.g., Nicaea, 325 AD). Nero’s deification and persecution (Tacitus, *Annals*, 15.44) or Antiochus’ Temple acts better fit Daniel 7-8. Your papal theory defies historical continuity and biblical context.
1844 Inconsistency: If the 2300 years end in 1844, why no global judgment then? White’s post-hoc adjustment after the Great Disappointment (1844) is illogical, lacking divine confirmation. The 70-week timeline (457 BC to 33 AD) fits Christ’s ministry, not a 2300-year stretch.

Your logic, Phil, is a White-inspired fantasy, not divine reason.

5. Adventism’s Satanic Evils: A Cult of Lies

Your “Jesuit lies” slur and Antichrist claims stem from Seventh-day Adventism’s demonic core, built on White’s lies:

Adventist Error	Details	Biblical Refutation
False Prophecies	White’s 1856, 1844, 1845 failures (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, p. 131-132).	Deuteronomy 18:22
Investigative Judgment	Denies Christ’s atonement (The Great Controversy, p. 421-422).	Hebrews 9:12
Sabbath Idolatry	Salvific Sabbath lacks support (The Great Controversy, p. 605-612).	Colossians 2:16-17
Anti-Catholic Hatred	White’s Babylon claim (The Great Controversy, p. 50).	Matthew 16:18-19
Plagiarism	White stole from authors (The White Lie by Walter Rea).	Revelation 22:18-19

Adventism is a satanic cult, chaining you to White’s lies and a works-based gospel.

Jan, you were right about Phil.

The website he gave the link to was of Andrews University, a private institution owned and operated by the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The specific URL points to the “Journal of the Adventist Theological Society” (JATS), a peer-reviewed academic journal published by Andrews University, which focuses on theological and biblical studies from an Adventist perspective. The content is authored by scholars affiliated with Adventist institutions, and the journal’s mission is to advance Adventist theology, including doctrines like the Investigative Judgment and Sabbath-keeping.

The specific article linked (article 1321, context JATS) is titled “The Heavenly Sanctuary and the Time of the Investigative Judgment” by Clifford Goldstein, published in 2008. This article defends the Adventist doctrine of the Investigative Judgment, a key belief tied to Daniel 8:14’s 2300-day prophecy and the events of October 22, 1844.

This of course has numerous erros, theological,biblical etc

Goldstein argues that Christ entered the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary on October 22, 1844, to begin the Investigative Judgment, reviewing believers’ lives to determine their salvation (The Heavenly Sanctuary, p. 3-5).

This contradicts Hebrews 9:12, which states, “He entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption,” indicating Christ’s entry at His ascension (c. 33 AD), not 1844. Hebrews 10:10-14 affirms His sacrifice “made perfect forever those who are being made holy,” negating a 1844 review. John 5:24 promises believers “will not be judged,” undermining a post-cross investigation. White’s 1844 date, adopted by Goldstein, stems from the Great Disappointment, not Scripture.

This Adventist doctrine assumes a multi-phase atonement, delaying Christ’s intercession, which defies the New Testament’s immediacy (1 John 2:1-2). This elevates human works over grace, conflicting with Ephesians 2:8-9.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.