HAGIA THROUGHOUT
THE BOOK
HAGIA IN THE
KING JAMES
A UNIQUE USAGE
WITHIN THE VEIL
HAGIA THROUGHOUT THE BOOK
"Hagia" in
the plural is a key word, and occurs 8 times in the Book of
Hebrews (not counting the doubled term in 9:3 for "holies
of holies"). It is the key to all the crucial passages
between 8:1 and 10:23.
When the Evangelicals see the word,
"hagia," they tell us, as Dr. Canon did in the
above quotation, that it means "all heaven." Or, as
is done in every instance in the New-International Version
(which is why it is Desmond Ford's most-quoted version),
they will declare that it means the "holies of holies,"
or the second apartment.
But there are two facts that you should
keep in mind here (1) The King James Version is also guilty
of mistranslating "hagia" at times. So a proper
translation of "hagia" will not always agree
with the King James. More on this below.
(2) "Hagia" is a noun, and in declension sometimes appears
as "hagion." Do not become confused by this
fact. We are able in each passage to tell its mode, and therefore
can know each time that is is the plural form,
"hagia," that is here, which should properly
be translated as "first apartment;" and not
the singular of the same word. The only time
that the singular form of "hagia" occurs is in in 9:1,
which should be translated as an "entire two-apartment
sanctuary."
By now, you probably are beginning to see
why it was unwise for Dr. Murdoch and Heppenstall to so quickly
agree with Dr. Canon's translation of Hebrews 9: 11-12, that
in A.D. 31 Jesus went to "into heaven." They
needed to take time let the
Greek speak to them.
Remembering that in each of them, Paul
is speaking about the first apartment, and the SECOND
apartment, or the sanctuary as a whole, here are the 8
places where "hagia" is found in the book of Hebrews:
8:2, 9:2. 9:8. 9:12, 9:24, 9:25, 10:19, 13:11.
In addition to the above, (1) in 9:3 the
word is given in a doubling: "holies of holies" (hagia
hagion), and thus means the second, not the first apartment.
(2) The singular of "hagia" is found in 9:1 (and there
means "entire sanctuary of two apartments").
Notice how crucial in importance are those
9:1-5 definitions! And yet how clearly defined the definitions
are in those verses! In 9:1, Paul is obviously speaking about
both apartments, In 9:2, about only the first apartment, and
in 9:5, only about the second apartment.
But are there not some, even in our own
ranks, who believe that "hagia" in Hebrews should be
translated as "sanctuary"? Yes, there are.
Some of our people believe that "Hagia"
in 8:2, 9:8, 9:12, 9:24 9;25;10:19 and 13:11 means "sanctuary"
(of two apartments) and not the first apartment. But that
interpretation violates Paul's definitions given in 9:1-5.
Yet if some wish to so apply it, it will do no violence to our
historic beliefs. (This is because in A.D. 31 Christ entered
the Sanctuary in heaven as He entered its first apartment. By
A.D. 65 when Paul wrote Hebrews, Jesus was still in the Sanctuary
and still in the first apartment). To say that Jesus went
into the Sanctuary does not require that He went into its second
apartment
But there is a very definite weakness in
saying that "hagia" means the sanctuary as a
whole, rather than only its first apartment. By so doing, we
are not adhering to Paul's definitions, and if we will not do
so, what reason do we have to complain when the Evangelicals
do not do so either! (They interpret "hagia" as
"all heaven" or as "most holy place,", in
clear violation of the definition given by Paul in 9:2.)
Before leaving this point, it is of historical
interest that our leading twentieth-century Sanctuary expositor,
M.L. Andreasen, applied "hagia" to the sanctuary as
a whole. But we must remember that Elder Andreasen did no face
the Evangelicals/new theology challenge that our church does
today. We were forced to study deeper into these matters than
that respected student had to do.
HAGIA IN THE KING JAMES
We mentioned earlier that the King James
Version has some mistranslations of "hagia." In our
very complete 76-page Biblical Sanctuary, we give a listing of
38 translations of "hagia" (pp. 13: 2-3).
Unfortunately, the King James translators
did not notice Paul's 9:2 definition of "hagia."
In order to better understand the KJV translations,
we do well to first review this information: The word "hagia"
("holy [places]") is the plural of "hagion"
("holy [place]"), and is Paul's chosen phrase in the
Book of Hebrews for the first apartment of the sanctuary, and
not both apartments of that structure, and definitely not its
second apartment! Now, let us see how the KJV translates this
important word, "hagia":
In 8:2, 9:2, and 13:11-the KJV translates "hagia"
as "sanctuary" (not knowing Paul's 9:2 definition
of the word, this would be a correct translation of "hagia").
In 9:24-the KJV translates "hagia"
as "holy places" (also a correct translation
by the KJV translators who did not grasp the significance of
the 9:2 definition).
In 9:12 and 9:25-the KJV
translates "hagia" as "holy place"
(which is a mistranslation of "hagia" but correct with
context and Paul's intent-for "holy place" in the Old
Testament means "the first apartment."
In 10:19-the KJV incorrectly
translates "hagia" as "holiest" In 9:8-the
KJV incorrectly translates "hagia" as "holiest
of all." In both 10:19 and 9:8. The KJV ignorantly
translated "hagia" as the second apartment. Paul's
9:2 definition would render it the first apartment, and the Old
Testament name for it as "holy place" would also render
it the first apartment.
(In addition, going by the immediate context
of 9:1-5, the KJV translators correctly translated 9:1 as "sanctuary,"
and they correctly translated the double plural "hagia"
in 9:3 as "holiest of all," or the second apartment.)
The incorrect translations in the KJV are
obviously an important part of the overall problem. Fortunately,
we do not have too many problems like this in the KJV. But, as
a result, people will say, "Well, it says 'holiest of all'
in the King James, and you say it means something else"
The message of Hebrews is that Jesus had
gone into the first apartment of the heavenly Sanctuary and was
ministering there in our behalf. Scripture never disagrees with
itself. The prophets never disagree among themselves. But the
KJV translators could not be expected to know the advanced truth
that God revealed to His people in the mid-nineteenth century.
YET THE TRUTH WAS RlGHT THERE IN HEBREWS!
Paul wrote it 1,546 years before the KJV
was printed. Ironically, if William Miller had discovered Paul's
9:1-5 definitions, he could have known in the 1820's that Jesus
was ministering in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary
before 1844! The antitype of the "cleansing of the sanctuary,"
given in Daniel 8:14, would then have easily been connected with
its parallel passages in Leviticus 16 and Miller would have been
able to learn, long before Samuel Snow and Hiram Edson, the truth
about the great event that would begin on October 22, 1844.
A UNIQUE USAGE
Just now, for a moment, let me emphasize
again that Paul's use of words for "sanctuary," "first
apartment," and "second apartment" is indeed unique!
He calls the first apartment the "holy places" ("hagia"
which means "holies" or "holy [places],"
with "places" inferred [a common Greek technique; compare
John 1:11, where we know from the genders that the verse should
say "He came to his own (home), and His own (people) knew
Him not."]
But so we will not mistake his pattern,
Paul then calls the second apartment the "holies of holies"
("hagia hagion"; the "of" puts the second
"hagia" into the genitive case and gives it an "on"
ending). Then, he calls the entire two apartment sanctuary the
"hagion" which is the singular of "hagia".
This is very unusual, but we must admit, since, reading 9:1-5,
that these are obviously the words that Paul wanted to write
for our three English equivalents.
Hebrews 9:1 is the only time in the Book
of Hebrews where the sanctuary (of two apartments) is found.
Everywhere else in Hebrews, Paul uses the word "skene"
("tabernacle" from "tent"), probably so there
might be no confusion with "hagia" It really does seem
as if he made "first apartment" plural on purpose to
underline the fact in Hebrews 8 through 10 that Jesus had gone
into the first, and not the second apartment in heaven.
Hebrews 9:3 is the only time in that book
where the "second apartment" is found. Does that seem
strange? Why should it. Paul wrote this book about the year A.D.
65. By that time, Jesus had been in the first apartment of the
heavenly Sanctuary for 34 years. lt would be another 1,779 years
before Jesus went into the second apartment. Whether or not Paul
correctly understood Daniel 8:14 and 9: 24-27, we cannot know.
But it is obvious that he very clearly understood that in
his time in history, Jesus was in the first apartment of the
heavenly Sanctuary.
WITHIN THE VEIL
Before leaving the definitions given in
9:1-5, let us for a moment look at that last one, for it explains
Hebrews 6:19- 20. Albion Ballenger (later to be echoed by Desmond
Ford) claimed that Hebrews 6:19-20 absolutely proved that Jesus
went into second apartment in A.D. 31.
Many years ago, Albion Fox Ballenger (1861-1921)
tried to bring in a variant set of doctrinal areas that had partial
similarities to those of the Evangelicals. In the 1905 crisis,
our people made their decision and rejected his errors, which
were in some respects similar to those now held by the Evangelicals
and our own new theology advocates. Ballenger was a master with
the pen, and he later wrote a letter to Ellen White that is extremely
well-written. He wanted it to be a masterpiece, for he widely
circulated it afterward, although with little effect. But it
is all based on a simple error that we will explain below. Here
is the letter:
"When side by side we stand before
the great white throne; if the Master should ask me why I taught
that 'within the veil' {in Hebrews 6:19} was in the first apartment
of the sanctuary, what shall I answer? Shall I say, 'Because
Sister White, who claimed to be commissioned to interpret the
Scriptures for me, told me that this was the true interpretation,
and that if I did no accept it and teach it, I would rest under
Your condemnation"?
Oh, Sister White that this answer might
be pleasing unto the Lord. Then would I surrender to your testimony.
Then would you speak words of encouragement to me again. Then
would my brethren, with whom I have held sweet counsel, no longer
shun me as a leper. Then would I appear again in the great congregation,
and would weep and pray and praise together as before."
A.L. Ballenger, quoted in Cast Out for the Cross of Christ, p.
112.
In reality, the Bible itself teaches that
"within the veil" in Hebrews 6:19 refers to Christ's
entrance into the first apartment; Ellen White simply agreed
with it.
Here is Hebrews 6:19-20:
{6:19}
"Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure
and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;
{16:20} whither the Forerunner is for us entered, even
Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec."
Just what does 6: 19-20 say, and
what does it not say? According to this passage, (1) Jesus had
already gone somewhere by Paul's time. (2) That place was "within
the veil." And that is all we are told! In spite of all
Ballenger's and Ford's claims to the contrary, Hebrews 6:19-20
does not say 'second apartment,' and it does not say "most
holy place."
The key word here is obviously "veil."
The question here would be this: does Paul in 6:19 mean
the FIRST veil (leading into the first apartment),
or the SECOND veil (leading into the second apartment)?
In the Old Testament, we find one Hebrew word for the first
apartment veil. But we are dealing
with the Book of Hebrews,
and not the Old Testament Hebrew.
We have already seen that Paul uses his
own type of definitions for the first and second apartments-different
than anywhere else in the Bible,-so we do well to stay close
to Paul's use of the word "veil" in the Book of
Hebrews. In this book we have that word defined in just one
place--Hebrews 9:3,--but in that one place it is so carefully
defined that we can have no doubt as to what Paul has in mind
in 6:19.
Hebrews 6:19 says that, by the time
that Paul wrote Hebrews, Jesus had already passed within "the
veil" on our behalf. But which one of the two veils?
Is it possible that Paul did not know that there were two veils?
This point is crucial. In 9:3, we learn that Paul did know
about the two veils, and that he there gave us the name for
the second of these: "To (the) deuteron (second) katapetasma
(veil)," or "the second veil."
Now we look back at Hebrews 6:19,
and there we find "eis (into) to (the)
esoteron (interior within) tou (the) katapetasmatos
(veil)." It is just "veil;" it is
not "second veil nor is
it "veils" If the Greek of 6:19 was
"second veil," we would know that Jesus entered the
second apartment in A.D. 31 and was there when Paul wrote Hebrews
in A.D. 65. If the Greek was "veils, " then we would
know that Jesus passed through both the first and second veil
in A.D. 31 and was in the second apartment in A.D. 65. But instead,
the word is "veil,"-so we can know that Jesus went
into the first apartment of the heavenly Sanctuary in A.D. 31.
Thank the Lord! The prophets agree!
Back
to Index | Next
