Page |0

Introduction

The sanctuary identity in Daniel 8 is an important issue that needs to be explored in order to
better understand the core of this visionary prophecy and its climactic auditory revelation of
verse 14: ‫ ְונִצְּדַ ק ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬wǝ·ni·ṣdaq qóḏeš “then shall the sanctuary be granted justice.”1
The prophetic vision of Daniel 8, dated in the third year of Belshazzar, coregent king of
Babylon, describes a conflict between East and West, where the Persian “ram” is defeated by
the Greek “male goat.” Then, at the height of its power, the goat’s unique and frontal horn is
broken (representing the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC), and four other horns rise in
its stead (the four main Hellenistic kingdoms to which Alexander’s empire was divided).
Finally a new horn, waxing out of one of the four,2 grows exceedingly great – first
horizontally, over the South, and East, and Canaan; then vertically, towards the heavens. It
directs its arrogant attack against the “heavenly host of stars,” “the people of the saints” (Dan
8:24), God’s “kingdom of priests and holy nation” (Ex 19:5-6).3 It rises against the prince of
the host (“the prince of princes,” Dan 8:25), whose image suggests a divine person. This
divine identification does not necessarily contradict the possibility that the captain of the host
may be also a human being, even a “high priest”.4
1
All translations, unless otherwise noted, are by the author.
2
The text does not specify which “four”. Most translations assume “four horns”. Conversely, Gerhard Hasel
(“The ‘Little Horn,’ the Heavenly Sanctuary and the Time of the End: A Study of Daniel 8:9-14”, in
Symposium on Daniel, ed. F B Holbrook, BRI: Washington DC, 1986:387-94) argued that it must be
understood: “out of one of [the four winds]”. Likewise, Arthur Bloomfield (The End of Days, Baker
Publishing, 1998:165), writes: “The little horn, we are told, is to come out of one of the four winds of heaven
(vs. 8).” C.f. Jacques Doukhan (Secrets of Daniel, Review and Herald, Hagerstown, MD, 2000:125). A first
reason to have the “little horn” sprouting from another horn, is that it is more logical than coming out of a
wind and this is how as it is understood by most scholars. The reference to “winds” in the preceding clause,
lə·’arba‘ rûḥôṯ haš·šåmáyim ”towards the four winds of heaven”, Dan 8:8, cf. 11:4), is not the true referent
for ’aḥaṯ mē·hém “one of them” (8:9), because “towards the four winds of heaven” is an adverbial phrase
depending on the verbal expression wat·ta·‘lé·na “[four conspicuous horns] have grown” (8:8). Thus horns is
the implicit antecedent, because it is the closest one, syntactically and logically, though in the wording itself,
the term “winds” is closer. The supposedly grammatical chiastic agreement that has been suggested is not
convincing. The presence of the masculine form ‫מֵ הֶם‬, instead of the required feminine form ‫מֵ הֶן‬, is not Standard
Hebrew, since it is a grammatical disagreement. But it is merely a formal disagreement, specific to spoken
Hebrew that often uses masculine forms for both genders (e.g. Ex 1:21; Ez 5:6; 10:17; 20:16; see the very
noun ‫ קֶ ֶרן‬in Dt 33:17). Hasel (“The ‘Little Horn’”, 391-92) was well aware of this phenomenon, therefore he
resolved that “either is possible”, that is both antecedents, winds or horns..
3
D. Barthélémy (Critique textuelle de L’Ancien Testament, Tome 3, Fribourg, Suisse, 1992, pag. 464) noted the
ministerial use of the term ‫ ָצבָא‬ṣåḇå’ (host, war, army, regular service): „Étant donnée la correspondence existant
entre le temple terrestre et le temple céleste, il semble bien que le mot ‫ ָצבָא‬désigne aux vss 10 à 13, sous la
métaphore de l’armée des étoiles, les ministres du culte (lévites et fidèles).” The term ‫ ָצבָא‬ṣåḇå’ host is
metaphorically applied to all celestial and terrestrial array of bodies / beings (Gn 2:1, or metaphorically in 2K
17:16, Is 24:21, stars =angels). The same root is used in connection to sanctuary ministry (Ex 38:8; Nu
4:3.23.30.35. 39.43, 8:24; 1S 2:22), which fits well our context. The sacred name of God Himself in the Hebrew
Bible, ‫(( יְהוָה ְצבָאֹות‬e.g. Am 4:13), “Yahweh [God] of the hosts” (the Warrior, the Powerful) contains a plural
form of ‫ ָצבָא‬ṣåḇå’.
4
Expositors do not agree over the identity of this heavenly and supreme commander. M A Beek (Das
Danielbuch, Ginsberg, Leiden, 1935:80), apud Ephrem Syrus, held that it was the high priest Onias. J A
 Page |1

In its attack against the starry host and against its commander in chief, the wicked horn storms
the sanctuary, the place where God would meet His people. Not only the truth and the
heavenly host are thrown to the ground and trampled underfoot, not only the supreme
commander is bereft of His daily-sacrifice-centered ministry (8:11), but also His sanctuary is
described as “thrown to the ground” and “trampled underfoot (8:11-12),” while its tāmîd is
replaced by “the desolating sin (or: the appalling rebellion),” which in the next visions is
called “the abomination of desolation” (or the appalling and disgusting idolatry). is replaced
by an abhorrent “service” of disobedience.
What is the identity of this abused and then vindicated sanctuary? Is it the old temple of
Jerusalem? Is it a Jewish eschatological temple? Is it just a theological metaphor? Or it is a
reference to an archetypal, heavenly sanctuary?
The various answers, suggested by such questions, usually stem from theological preferences:
 Preterist approaches, that are mainly historical critical5 identify the sanctuary with
the historical Jewish temple in Jerusalem, profaned by Antiochus Epiphanes and
cleansed by Judas the Maccabee.6
 Futurists expect a future temple in Jerusalem to be rebuilt, and then polluted by the
Antichrist.7

Montgomery (A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel, ICC, Clark, Edinburgh, 1927: 335)
cited Polychronius and Ibn Ezra saying that the Prince must be Michael (cf. Dan 12:1), God’s captain of the host
(cf. Jos 5:14-15). A Lacocque (Le Livre de Daniel, Delachaux, Neuchatel, 1976:162) maintained that the captain
of the host is both Michael and the high priest, inasmuch as heavenly and earthly worlds are connected in the
book. J J Collins (Daniel, Fortress Press, Minneapolis, 1993: 333), thinks that the captain is God Himself. On
the other hand, Justin Martyr (Dial. c. Trypho, 62), Origen, Cyprian, Eusebius, Theodoret, etc., identified God’s
captain of the host, that appeared to Joshua, to either the Lord’s angel, who talk to Moses (Ex 3), or the prince
Michael of Daniel. See Keil’s Commentary on Joshua chap. 5, vv. 13–15, and Philip Schaff, Oration in Praise of
Constantine by Eusebius Pamphilius (NPNF 2-01), Christian Literature Publishing Co., New York, 1890: 101 fn
40).
5
E.g. J J Collins, Daniel, Hermeneia series, Fortress Press, Minneapolis, 1993: 334-36.
6
E.g. 1Mac 1:59; 4:52-54; 2Mac 1:18; 5:5.
7
E.g. Hal Lindsey, Planet Earth 2000 AD (Palos Verde, California: Western Front, 1994:153-67); Randall Price,
The Coming Last Days Temple (Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House, 1999); Dave Hunt, The Cup of Trembling.
Jerusalem in Bible Prophecy (Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House, 1995).
 Page |2

 Idealistic, spiritual, symbolic or mystical interpretations have also been suggested

by Jewish and Christian theologians: the sanctuary is the heaven8 or the universe,9
the church,10 Christ Himself11 or the human body and soul.12
 Some commentators, mainly historicist, since the 19-th century believe that the
sanctuary of Daniel 8 is an archetypal heavenly sanctuary.13
Our approach will argue, on linguistic basis and Hebrew literary use, that the sanctuary
in Daniel 8 is the heavenly one.

Two Hebrew terms for sanctuary in Daniel 8

In the vision of Daniel 8, the author uses two different Hebrew terms that have been translated
in English as sanctuary or holy place: ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš (8:11) and ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qóḏeš (8:13,14). This lexical

8
Douglas E Cox, “God's sanctuary is heaven!” (in The Creation concept > Bible Studies >The 2,300 Days of
Daniel), on www.sentex.net/~tcc/index.html 1998. “God's sanctuary is heaven, or the universe.” D E Cox has a
scientific-cosmologic interpretation of Dan 8:14. The 2300 “days” extend from 552 BC (the date of the vision,
cf. Dan 8:1) to about 1750, the time of the Enlightenment, when the true cosmology has been vindicated (!).
9
Philo (Migr. Abr. 102; Som. 1.215; cf. Fug. 108) quoted by Margaret Barker (“Temple Imagery In Philo: An
Indication Of The Origin Of The Logos?” in W. Horbury, ed, Templum Amicitiae: Essays on the Second Temple,
Presented to Ernst Bammel, (JSOT Press: Sheffield, 1991: 90). www.barker_logos in philo.pdf : “For there are,
as is evident, two temples of God: one of them this universe, in which there is also as High Priest His First-born,
the divine Word, and the other the rational soul, whose Priest is the real Man.”
10
John Gill (1819), “Daniel Chapter 8”in Exposition of the Old and New Testament, at www.sacred-texts.com
(online ed. J B Hare and ME Casey): “Indeed, as Antiochus was a type of antichrist, and his persecution of that
desolation made by antichrist in the church; these 2300 days may be considered as so many years […] when it
may be hoped there will be a new face of things upon the sanctuary and church of God, and a cleansing of it
from all corruption in doctrine, discipline, worship, and conversation.” (Emphasis supplied).
11
C H Spurgeon, “Christ a Sanctuary”, Sermon (No. 3522), at the Metropolitan Tabernacle, Newington, July 27,
1916. at www.spurgeongems.org.
12
Tzvi Freedman, “What is the Temple?”; Yanki Tauber, “The Insignificant Coat”, at
www.moshiach.com/temple/articles 1999; David P. McMahon, “The General Conference of 1901”, in Ellet
Joseph Waggoner: The Myth and the Man, Verdict: Fallbrook CA, 1979: 147-184, at
http://sdanet.org/atissue/books. The reaction of W Spicer, to the pantheistic ideas of J H Kellogg, E J Waggoner
and their group: “Where is heaven? I was asked. I had my idea of the center of the universe, with heaven and the
throne of God in the midst, but disclaimed any attempt to fix the center of the universe astronomically. But I was
urged to understand that heaven is where God is, and God is everywhere in the grass, in the trees, in all creation.
There was no place in this scheme of things for angels going between heaven and earth, for heaven was here and
everywhere. The cleansing of the sanctuary that we taught about was not something in a far-away heaven. The
sin is here (the hand pointing to the heart), and here is the sanctuary to be cleansed. To think of God as having a
form in the image of which man was made, was said to be idolatry....” See also about Robert Brinsmead at
www.archive.org. Brinsmead combined perfectionism with the sanctuary concept. He compared the two
divisions of the Israelite sanctuary with two spiritual divisions or phases of soul salvation (the conscious level,
and the subconscious level), corresponding to justification and sanctification, and to the two phases of Christ’s
heavenly ministry.
13
O R L Crosier (“The Law of Moses”, Day Star, Extra, Feb. 7, 1846:38): “The Sanctuary to be cleeansed at the
end of 2300 days is also the Sanctuary of the new covenant, for the vision of the treading down and cleansing is
after the crucifixion. We see that the Sanctuary of the new covenant is not on earth, but in heaven.” J N
Andrews (The Sanctuary and 2300 Days, Steam Press, Battle Creek, MI, 1872: 76): “This heavenly sanctuary is
called by David, Habakkuk, and John, ‘the temple of God in heaven’…. ‘God’s holy habitation’,… ‘the
sanctuary, and true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man’…”; Z Stefanović (Daniel –Wisdom to the
Wise, Pacific Press, Nampa, ID, 2007:310, 326 fn 32): “in the context of the whole passage, the sanctuary in
heaven is intended”).
 Page |3

difference has led some authors14 to suppose a semantic and theological difference: ‫מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬
miqdåš must be a pagan sanctuary that is of the “horn” power, while ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qóḏeš is the
sanctuary of God or Prince of the host.
The proposal that the two Hebrew words describe two different sanctuaries is not convincing.
The use of synonyms is a common Hebrew15 and Danielic practice (e. g. Dan 9:17.26). The
literary context in Daniel 8 identifies the miqdåš sanctuary of Dan 8:11 with the qóḏeš
sanctuary of verse 13, where both terms are associated with the “daily sacrifice” and the
“host”, within the same camp which is attacked: host, Prince, sacrifice, sanctuary. Lexicons,
too, do not make any difference between ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš and ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qóḏeš . There is no hint in the
lexicons that ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš was preferred to denote a pagan sanctuary.16
The notion of a pagan sanctuary probably arose because of the reference to “his sanctuary” in
Dan 8:11 which was mistakenly understood to refer to the wicked horn-king, and not to the
Prince or Captain of the host, as the context requires.17 While the verbs in the sentence have
the wicked horn as subject, the nouns and pronouns as objects refer to the Captain of the Host.
The pronominal suffixes of the words ‫ מִ ּמֶּנּו‬mimménn·û “from him”18 and ‫ מִקְ ָּד ׁשֹו‬miqdåš·ô “his
sanctuary” are in the masculine, while the subject ‫ קֶ ֶרן‬qéren “horn” is feminine. Therefore, the
suffix pronominal of ‫ מִקְ ָּד ׁשֹו‬miqdåš·ô “his sanctuary” can hardly refer to the wicked horn.

14
J N Andrews (The Sanctuary…, pp. 36-38), following Apollos Hale, argues that in Daniel 8 there is also a
pagan / false Christian sanctuary, which is Rome, besides the heavenly sanctuary of God. The U Smith (Daniel
and the Revelation, p. 161) is of the same opinion. See also the SDA Reform Movement (“The Mystery of the
Daily”, 2011, http://ims.truepath.com/biblestudy/tamid/12.html); Jeff Pippenger (criticized by G Woiler,
“Thoughts on the Daily…”, 2011: http://webelievesda.org/wp/?p=9 ), and the 1888 MPM Group (
www.1888mpm.org/articles/have-we-followed-cunningly-devised-fables?page=0,4 and ).
15
For example, the author of Psalm 74, uses three different terms in the same context,‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qóḏeš (vs 3), ‫מֹועֵד‬
mô‘ēḏ (vs 4), ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš (vs 7), meaning God’s sanctuary. Comparing the form of the commandment of Lv
19:30; 26:2, regarding the reverence for Sabbaths and sanctuary, ‫אֶת־ׁשַ ּבְת ַ ֹ֣תי ּתִ ׁשְ ֔מ ֹרּו ּומִקְ ּדָ ִׁ֖שי ּתִ ָ ֑יראּו‬, to the divine
reproach in Ez 22:8 ְ‫קָ דָ ׁשַ י ָּבזִית וְאֶת־ׁשַ ּבְת ֹתַ י ִח ָּללְּת‬, the main difference is the lexical variation ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬and ‫ ק ֹדֶ ש‬as
synonyms, meaning the same reality (The Masoretic ‫“ קָ דָ ׁשַ י‬my holy things” should be read as ‫“ קָ דְ ׁשִ י‬my
sanctuary”, cf. Targums, Vulgate and New Jerusalem Bible, Ez 23:38). Daniel also uses synonyms freely. For
example, in chapter 8, the male-goat is‫ ָצפִיר‬or ‫( ׂשָ עִיר‬vs 21). The prophetic vision is called ‫ חָזֹון‬ḥåzôn (vs 1, 2, 13,
15, 17, 26) and ‫ מַ ְַראֶה‬ma·r‘ê (vs 16). In chapter 10 it is called ‫ מַ ְרָאה‬ma·r‘åh (vs 7, 8, 16). One may add the
synonyms ‫ ִחּזָיֹון‬ḥizzåyôn (Is 22:5),‫ חָזּות‬ḥåzûṯ (Is 29:11) and ‫ מַ ֲחזֶח‬maḥzêh (Ez 13:7) that are also used in the
Hebrew Bible.
16
Of the 75 occurrences of the term ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš in the Hebrew Bible, only 6 refer to a pagan or illegal Israelite
sanctuary (Is 16:12; Am 7:9,13; Ez 7:24; 21:2; 28:18). It is used elsewhere in Daniel, only as the sanctuary of
Yahweh in Jerusalem that was desecrated and desolated by pagan forces (Dan 9:17; 11:31).
17
Cf. NIV  Dan 8:11: “[The horn] set itself up to be as great as the Prince of the host; it took away the daily
sacrifice from him, and the place of his sanctuary was brought low.” (Emphasis supplied). The KJV translation,
which Miller used, is somehow confusing: “Yea, he magnified [himself] even to the prince of the host, and by
him [?] the daily [sacrifice] was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.”
18
Martin Pröbstle, in his PhD dissertation (Truth and Terror..., Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Mich.,
2006:194-205) did an exhaustive research in the syntax and semantics of the phrase ‫ ּומִ ּמֶּנּו ה ִֵרים‬ûmimmennû ḥērîm
“and from Him, it removed...”. There is no real liturgical use of ‫ ה ִֵרים‬ḥērîm “lift up [a sacred part, for priests]” in
this case, nor a reference to the wicked horn in the pronominal suffix of ‫ ּומִּמֶּנּו‬û·mimmenn·û.
 Page |4

The basic meaning of the noun ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qóḏeš is “what is holy”, “sacred thing(s)” or even
“sacredness”, and can thus be used as a collective noun, with a more general meaning.19
Therefore, some scholars argue that in Dan 8:14, ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qóḏeš is not precisely the “sanctuary”,
but holy things, in general, that have been attacked and desecrated: “the daily sacrifice”, the
sanctuary “host”, the holy people, their Captain, including certainly the sanctuary as place and
building.20 Others take ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qóḏeš as an abstract term, meaning “holiness”, with a more general
content, including divine worship, ceremonies, observation of the Law among others.21
While the etymological and lexical sense of the term ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qóḏeš is quite broad in itself, its
contextual and pragmatic22 sense in Dan 8:14 is limited to the “sanctuary”. First, this is a
common use in Hebrew.23 Second, the Hebrew of Daniel makes use of this meaning of
sanctuary (Dan 9:26). Third, the context limits its use, as a synonym of ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš. While
‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš is a name of the holy place where the heavenly host, Prince and liturgy meet, and
which is despised by the wicked horn and its host (Dan 8:10-12), ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qóḏeš denotes a reality
that is seen in the same vision, related to the sin against the daily liturgy, and to the host that
has been trodden underfoot (Dan 8:13). It appears to be the same reality, the sanctuary. The
only difference that could be argued for, is that the ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš was abandoned (or left in
ruins?),24 while ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qóḏeš was trodden underfoot, together with the host (v. 13). But in the
context, objects that are brought down, are also trodden underfoot (Dan 8:7.10), so that what
is applied to ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qóḏeš is also applied to ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš. It is best to consider this difference as
stylistic only.25
19
Cf. Ex 29:33; Lv 21:6; „they [offerings, priests] are ‫”ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬.
20
M Pröbstle (Truth and Terror, pp. 368, 421 fn 1) cites C F Keil (The Book of Prophet Daniel. Biblical
Commentary on the OT. Edinburgh: Clark, 1872, p. 305), B Hasselberg (Hoffnung in der Bedrängnis. Arbeit zu
Text und Sprache im AT, no. 4. St. Otilien: EOS, 1977, p. 106), and others to support such more general view,
which to Pröbstle seems acceptable, if one has the sanctuary in view as the main object.
21
Cf. J Knabenbauer (Commentarius in Danielem Prophetam, Cursus Scripturae Sacrae, pt. 3, vol. 4. Paris:
Lethielleux, 1891, p. 215), J E H Thomson (Daniel, Exposition. The Pulpit Commentary, vol. 23. London: Funk
& Wagnallis, 1913, p. 244), cited by Pröbstle (ibid.).
22
“Etymological”refers to the origin and history of a term; “lexical” refers to the term’s meaning(s) in lexicons;
“contextual” is here related to the literary context, sometimes called co-text; “pragmatic” is a technical term in
pragmatics (pragmatic linguistics – a subfield of linguistics which studies the ways in which context contributes
to meaning).  
23
Ex 28:29.35.43; 29:30; Ps 20:3; 63:3; 74:3; 134:2; Ez 44:27; 45:2; 11QT 4:7; 32:12; 11Q20 9:2 etc.
24
The verbal root ‫ שלך‬šlḵ Hif/Hof (Dan 8:11) has the proper meaning of “hurl”, “cast away”, “throw down”, but
it also has figurative meanings (to dispose of, expose, Gn 21:15; Ex 1:22; Ez 16:5; to abandon, Ps 71:9; Jr 9:18;
turn one’s back, despise, discard, 1K 14:9; Ps 50:17; Ez 23:35; Ne 9:26). In Daniel 8, the root ‫ שלך‬šlḵ is used
about the ram that was “thrown down”, “defeated” (v. 7), the divine truth that was “despised” (v. 12), and the
sanctuary, which was “left”, “abandoned”, or ”despised“ (v. 11).
25
An interesting observation that requires more research is that both Hebrew terms were understood not only as a
sanctuary building, but also as the holy ground or part dedicated to God and his ministers (Ez 45:4; Nu 18:29;
possibly also Jos 24:26, cf. ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬in Jos 5:15). ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬may also refer to any holy place of the sanctuary, including
the most holy place (Lv 16:33; 21:23). It even may refer to a holy ground, not related to a temple, as for example
in Jos 24:26 (cf. ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬in Jos 5:15). On the other hand, ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬also designates also the most holy appartment, when
the holy place is called „tabernacle” (Lv 16:16.17.20.23).
 Page |5

Måḵôn – dwelling or foundation ?

Another aspect to be clarified, before discussing the nature of the sanctuary in Dan 8:14 is the
meaning and function of the term ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn in v. 11.26 Lexicons provide three meanings of
‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn :
1. site, position, location, place (Ezra 2:68);
2. basis, base, footing, groundwork, foundation (Ps 89:15; 97:2; 104:5);
3. erection, seat, establishment, institution, settlement, habitation, see, residence, home,
quarters, abode, dwelling, domicile.27
The third meaning of ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn is the most frequent and the earliest attested.28 Synonyms of
‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn are: ‫ מָקוֺם‬måqôm “place” (position, seat; room, dwelling; sacred site), and ‫ מָעֹון‬måcôn
“dwelling” (or lair).29 These terms are also used in combination with ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš or ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qóḏeš:
‫ מְקֹום מִקְ ּדָ ׁשֹו‬məqôm mi·qdåš·ô “the place which is His sanctuary”, ‫ מְעֹון קָ דְ ׁשֹו‬məcôn qoḏš·ô “the
abode – His sanctuary” (or “His dwelling of holiness”, “His holy dwelling”). And all these
expressions refer practically everywhere to the heavenly sanctuary of God.30
Which is the most probable meaning of ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn in Dan 8:11? Does it mean the location or
place of the sanctuary? Or its foundation? While most translations render the phrase as “the
place of his sanctuary”,31 a few understand “the foundation of his sanctuary,”32 and still others
favor the meaning “his sanctuary dwelling”, or even “his sanctuary,” reading the two words in
apposition.33 The recognition of this apposition depends partially on the true semantic
identification of ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn in this case, as “dwelling”, not “place”, or “foundation”.

26
This is a noun from the root ‫כנן‬/‫ כון‬to stand, to be (set up, established, founded, sure, firm, determined, ready,
appointed, permanent), to endure. Of the same root come the nouns: ‫( ּכֵן‬place, position; housing; stand, stem,
shoot, base, pedestal), adjective ‫( ּכֵן‬correct, right, accurate), adverb ‫( ּכֵן‬thus, so, yes, similarly, firmly, rightly,
certainly, really). Cf. HALOT, Holladay, BDB, Clines etc.
27
Cf. the same lexicons. Its feminine pair ‫ מְכֹונָה‬is more frequent (25 times) and occurs in Kings, Jeremiah,
Zechariah, Chronicles, Ezra, and has similar meanings: stand, base, foundation, fixed resting place; dwelling
place, property, estate.
28
Cf. Ex 15:17; 1K 8:13, 39, 43, 49; 2Ch 6:2, 30, 33, 39; Ps 33:14; Is 4:5; 18:4.
29
Noun ‫ מָקֹום‬māqôm derives from the root ‫קום‬qwm (stand up, rise), while ‫ מָעֹון‬māğôn derives from the root ‫עון‬
ğ
wn III (to dwell, to reside). These three roots are not only synonymous, but even their phonology is similar:
māqôm, mākôn, māğôn. See also related forms: ‫ קֵן‬qēn < ‫ קנן‬qnn “nest”.
30
Dt 26:15; Ps 68:6; Jr 17:12; 25:30; Zc 2:17; 2Ch 30:27. earthly: Is 60:13.
31
Beginning with OG (τόπος = place) and Vulgate (locum = place), most translators maintained this traditional
meaning (see GNV, BBE, KJV, NKJ, NAS, NRS, NIB, CJB, JPS, ZUR, ELB, WEB etc.). It may be explained as
an expression of the prevailing use of mākôn in Late Hebrew (cf. Jastrow 781).
32
Cf. TOB, NJB, YLT, CAB, IEP etc. M Pröbstle (idem, 235), and E B de Souza (The Heavenly Sanctuary
Temple Motif. PhD Dissertation, Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Mich. 2005, p. 459) also prefer the
meaning “foundation”. This is the only meaning of mkwn mentioned in CAL.
33
L45 (die Wohnung seines Heiligtums = the dwelling of his sanctuary), SCL, MGK (τὸ ἅγιον κατοικητήριον
αὐτοῦ = his holy dwelling); “sanctuary”/ ”temple”/ “holy place” (NAB, NET, NIRV, NLT, TNIV, TNK).
 Page |6

Biblical Hebrew prefers the noun ‫ מָקוֺם‬måqôm to mean “place” (site). And whenever Biblical
Hebrew refers to the foundation(s) of a building, including the temple, it uses the root ‫ יסד‬ysd
“to lay foundations”.34 In all the other cases, ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn and especially ‫ מְכֹונָה‬məḵônåʰ are used
to mean “basis” or “fixed place”, referring to God’s throne (Ps 89:15),35 the foundations of the
earth (Ps 104:5), the old established site of the temple or altar (Ezra 2:68; 3:3) and the
pedestals of the ten basins etc.36 If the author in Daniel 8 had meant “foundation”, he would
probably have used ‫ מְכֹונָה‬məḵônåʰ, ‫ מּוסָד‬mûsåḏ or ‫ י ְסֹוד‬yəsôḏ.
A metaphoric use of ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn as “foundation” of the sanctuary in Daniel 8, is still appealing
and cannot be ruled out easily, if one refers to the concrete meaning of ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn in Ezra 2:68
and its metaphoric use in Psalms (89:14-15; 97:2). But we are not inclined to accept the idea
of “foundation” as the meaning intended by the author, because of the prevailing use of ‫מָכֹון‬
måḵôn as “dwelling,” and even as a traditional and poetic reference to God’s heavenly
dwelling, as we have shown above. Why should the wicked horn abandon or despise the
“foundation” of God’s sanctuary, and not the sanctuary itself as God’s heavenly residence?
The metaphoric use of ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn as “foundation” refers only to God’s throne (reign), never to
the temple, while the meaning of ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn as “dwelling place” perfectly satisfies the context
and the old use of the two associated nouns (‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn and ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš). This meaning seems
to be still dominant in Qumran Hebrew,37 and Targums also translate it as “dwelling place.”38
In Mishnaic Hebrew, where ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn still preserves the meaning of “residence” it is
sometimes used as the name of one of the “seven heavens” of Jewish tradition, probably the
sixth heaven.39 Such late tradition associating ‫“ מָכֹון‬dwelling” with “heaven” reflects a strong,
ancient and long lasting Jewish theology of God’s heavenly dwelling.
Consequently, to understand ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn in Daniel 8 as a dwelling place, not place or
groundwork, seems to be the best option. To “overthrow” physically or figuratively the place
itself (the site), or the foundation of the sanctuary, not the sanctuary itself, is probably an idea

34
Cf. 1K 5:31; 6:37; Is 44:28; Zc 4:9; 8:9; Ezra 3:6, 10-12; 2Ch 3:3; 8:16 ‫ מּוסָד‬mûsåḏ; Hab 3:13 ‫ י ְסֹוד‬yəsôḏ,
Biblical Aramaic (5:16; 6:3) uses the noun ‫’ אׁש‬ōš “[temple] foundation”(cf. Qumran Hebrew, 4Q266 10i:11).
35
In this case, some still understood “habitation [of thy throne]” (Webster 1833). In such case, the metaphor
describes God’s throne as dwelling within righteousness, not only based on righteousness.
36
Cf. 1K 7:27-43; 2K 16:17; 25:13-19; Jr 52:17, 20; 2Ch 4:14.
37
According to the Dictionary of Clines, in Qumran Hebrew (cf. 1QS 10:15; 4Q Instrd 178:3) the meaning of
“dwelling” and “dwelling place” is probably intended.
38
The Targums translate ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn as “established place for a house”(‫ אְתַ ר מְתֻ קַן ְלבֵית‬Ex 15:17); “place (or)
house” (1 ‫אְתַ ר בֵית‬K 8:39; 2Ch 6:30); “place of dwelling”( ‫ אְתַ ר ּדִ י מכוון‬Ps 97:2); “dwelling house” (‫ מדור בית‬Ps
33:14; 89:15); “dwelling ” ( 2‫מָ דֹור‬Ch 6:39); “My holy dwelling” (‫ מְ דֹור קֻ דׁשִי‬Is 18:4); and even “sanctuary”or
“selected holy place” (‫ מַקדַ ׁש‬Is 4:5). Only in Ps 104:5, where the context clearly requires the meaning
“foundation”, the Targum translates‫“ ְּבסִיסָה‬base”, “basis”.
39
Cf. Jastrow 781, reference to Hagigah 12b. Dalman confirms the use of ‫ מָכֹון‬as “dwelling place”, adding a
second use as “the name of the sixth heaven”.
 Page |7

too subtle to be true. On the other hand, the usual semantic use of the term ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn, when it
is related to the sanctuary, is about God’s heavenly dwelling, and it fits best the context, as it
will be demonstrated. The sanctuary is God’s dwelling, His home, His headquarters, the true
Holy See. Therefore, the phrase ‫ מְכֹון מִקְ ּדָ ׁשֹו‬məḵôn miqdåš·ô should be understood and translated
as such: “His sanctuary dwelling (or home, abode)”, or “His Holy See”.

The sanctuary location as it appears in the vision

Within the vision of Daniel 8, the sanctuary is seen in heaven together with the starry host and
its Supreme Commander. However, the heavenly host stands in the vision as a poetic image
for the holy people of God. It is possible to imagine a reference to angels (or more generally,
heavenly beings), since they are also called “saints” or “holy ones” in Daniel (Dan 4:13, 23;
8:13). In Revelation, angels have priestly service in heaven and from heaven (Rev 5:8; 8:1-4;
14:17-18; 15:1, 5-8). Angels are compared with the stars in Job 4:18 // 25:5; 38:7. However,
when Gabriel, the interpreting angel explains the vision, he uses the expression‫ְועַם־קְ ד ֹׁשִ ים‬
wə·‘am qəḏōšîm “and the people of saints”, as the equivalent of “the heavenly host”,40 and in
Dan 7:27, the Aramaic expression‫‘ עַם קַ ּדִ יׁשֵ י ֶעלְיֹונִין‬am qaddîšê ‘elyônîn “people of the saints of
the Most High”, describes the same reality. While God’s people are still on earth, they are
depicted in the vision as dwellers in heaven, a multitude of stars, according to the blessing
promised to the patriarchs,41 and to the comparison made by Daniel 12:3 and the symbolic use
in Revelation (1:16.20; 2:1; 3:1; 12:1, 4).
The wicked horn likewise is an earthly power, and all its actions occur physically on earth,
though they have symbolic, celestial overtones. not intended to describe actually a celestial
explorer, since it is Since the heavenly host and the heavenward wicked horn actually
represent human beings living on earth, in spite of their visionary appearence in heaven, the
heavenly appearence of the sanctuary in the same vision is not a sufficient proof, in order to
define its heavenly nature location.

The first clue in Exodus 15:17

It is interesting to note that six out of seven similar phrases (‫ מְקֹום מִקְ ּדָ ׁשֹו‬məqôm miqdåš·ô and
‫ מְעֹון קָ דְ ׁשֹו‬məcôn qodš·ô ) used in the Hebrew Bible describe God’s heavenly sanctuary.42 The

40
Dan 8:24; cf. holy people in Lev 20:26; Dt 7:6; 14:2, 21; 26:19; 28:9; Is 62:12; 63:18; Dan 12:7.
41
Gn 15:5; 22:17; 26:4; 32:13; 37:9; Dt 1:10; 10:22; 28:62; 1Ch 27:23; Heb 11:12.
42
The heavenly sanctuary: Dt 26:15; Ps 68:6 (cf. the context); Jr 17:12; 25:30; Zc 2:17; 2Ch 30:27. The earthly
sanctuary: Is 60:13.
 Page |8

heavenly sanctuary of God is an undisputable reality in the theology of the Hebrew Bible.43
Likewise, where the noun ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn is associated with God, in most cases it refers to His
celestial see. But the most striking observation is that the two words of the phrase in Dan 8:11
(‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn and ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš·ô ) are only once associated, outside the book of Daniel, in Ex
15:17, where each of them appears for the first time in the Hebrew Bible.44 They are not
connected in a construct chain, as in Daniel 8, but they function as equivalent terms in parallel
verses:

43
The heavenly sanctuary was a commonplace Israelite belief. Therefore it is no wonder that their archaic poetry
and classical hymnody (the Psalter) is full of such references. The theme of a heavenly sanctuary appears in the
most natural manner. Ps 11:4 refers to Yahweh’s “holy palace” (temple) and “throne in heaven” ( ‫)ּבַּׁשָמַ י ִם ִּכסְאֹו‬. Ps
18:6-9 refers to God’s celestial home in an implicit way (God answered “from His palace / temple”, cf. NET,
heavenly). According to Ps 20:3, God’s headquarters, where He listens to prayers, is His “Zion” and “sanctuary,”
which are clearly located in heaven (verse 7). In Ps 29:9-10 the reference to the heavenly sanctuary is implicit
(see also Ps 93:1-5; 96:6.10). In Ps 33:13-14 God’s home sanctuary is explicitly in heaven. In Psalm 68 God is
called by the archaic appellative ‫“ רֹכֵב ָּבע ֲָרבֹות‬the one who rides on the clouds”, and is referred as “God in His
holy abode” (verses 5-6 NIV, NET etc.). He descended in majesty on Mt Sinai (verses 8-9), and next in the
sanctuary (verses 18, 24 NIV, NJB etc). God is called “the one who rides on (or, is sit above) the heaven’s
heaven of old” (verse 34), “whose power is in the skies” (verse 35), a God who is venerable in His sanctuary
(verse 36 NIV). In Ps 78: 54, 69 Asaph takes over the language of Ex 15:13,17, that was composed and sung,
before any tabernacle or temple were built. God Himself built His sanctuary “like the heights,... like the earth,
which He founded forever”. Ps 15:1, as well as other psalter verses (23:6; 24:3; 27:4; 65:5) shows the poet’s
desire to live forever in God’s “palace”. We are inclined to believe that this desire was not so much to dwell
actually in the temple’s courts at Jerusalem, but rather in God’s heavenly dwelling, the final destiny of believers,
as mentioned in Ex 15:13, 17. There is surely a connection between the two places. The old prophetess Anna (Lc
2:36-37) and other people literally dedicated themselves to the Temple’s devotion. The Psalter describes the true
believers as people who love God’s temple. They are “planted in the house of Yahweh, they will flourish in the
courts of our God.” (Ps 92:13 NJB). But the Israelite believers sang in the desire not only to “dwell on God’s
mountain”, but also to “live in His tent”, or “in His house”, “forever”, which was not possible anyway, even to
the priests of the earthly sanctuary. Prophets also attest the reality of the heavenly sanctuary in their oracles and
poems. In Ps 150:1, the heaven’s dwellers are called to “praise God in His sanctuary”, in His strong skies. In the
official prayer of Solomon, for the dedication of the temple, reported in 1Kings 8 and 2Chronicles 6, there are
some of the most obvious references to the heavenly sanctuary. Solomon knew that “the sky and the highest
heaven cannot contain” Him, 1K 8:27; 2Ch 2:6; 6:18), and that God’s dwelling in the temple is rather symbolic.
He explicitly shows that any prayer oriented toward the earthly sanctuary will be answered by God “from
heaven” where His true royal residence is located (1K 8:30, 39, 43, 49; 2Ch 6:21, 30, 33, 39). In view of this old
Israelite theology, it is no wonder that after centuries, priestly prayers in the time of king Hezekiah reached
God’s “holy dwelling place in heaven” (2Ch 30:26-27). Jonah’s (2:7; cf Ps 18:6-9; 20:3) prayer came to God’s
holy temple, though he was far “away from the face of Yahweh”. In Ps 102:20 God looks “down from his
sanctuary above; from heaven... toward earth”. Micah (1:2-3) in his verses describes Yahweh coming “out of His
place”, descending “from His holy palace”, and marching “on the earth's mountaintops”. Habakkuk (2:20) points
implicitly to Yahweh’s heavenly palace, when he says, “Hush before Him, the whole earth!” Ezekiel (28:17-21)
describes the paradise as the holy mount of God, where a cherubim guardian is mentioned, and the gems on the
high priest’s breastplate are referred (which interestingly in LXX are 12). Zechariah (2:13, or 2:17 in LXX) saw
how God was about to leave His (implicit) heavenly abode, and wrote: “Hush before Yahweh, every creature”.
The eschatological, mystical temple that Messiah had to build (Zc 6:12-13) should not be confused to God’s
heavenly sanctuary. While the heavenly sanctuary is God’s home in the whole Hebrew era, the Messianic temple
had to be built by Messiah. However, there might be essential theological connections between the two, and
further research is necessary.
44
We noted this intertextual link between Dan 8:11 and Ex 15:17 before 1999 (F G Lăiu, “An Exegetical Study
of Daniel 7-9”, MTh diss., UNISA, Pretoria, 1999: 112), independent from Friedbert Ninow (“Indicators of
Typology within the Old Testament...”, PhD diss., Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Mich. 1999:158-159),
and Elias De Souza (op. cit. 148). They noted this connection, even showing that Ex 15:17 points to the celestial
sanctuary, as a possible, secondary application. To us, this is not only a possibility, because the emphasis in Ex
 Page |9

Ex 15:17b ‫מָ כֹון לְׁשִ בְּתְ ָך ָּפ ַעלְּתָ י ְהוָה‬ må·ḵôn lə·šiḇt·əḵå på‘al·tå Yahweʰ
Ex 15: 17c ‫מִ קְּדָ ׁש אֲ דֹנָי ּכֹונְנּו י ָדֶ יָך‬ mi·qdaš ’Ăḏōn·åy kônən·ū yåḏ·êḵå

A dwelling home that Thou Yahweh have made,

A sanctum, Lord, Thy hands have set it staid
The striking parallel verses using the two terms ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn and ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš indicate
synonymy in this case. Moreover, the theological identity of God’s home and sanctuary is
clearly revealed in this passage. It is not a sanctuary that people have made for God, but the
sanctuary that God made for His people. These verses belong to the Song of the Sea, where
Israel celebrated the marvelous crossing and victory, looking forward, to their celestial, over
the world destiny – from the horrible slavery camp, to their homeland of freedom – from the
gorge of the Red Sea, to God’s Holy See.45
While the author does not explicitly point to a heavenly place for this sanctuary home, the
reference seems to be to God’s heavenly habitation. First, this song appears before the
command to erect a tabernacle (Ex 19:1; 25:8). Second, the author repeatedly affirms that the
sanctuary in view is a God-built structure.46 Third, there is still another verse in this song,
anticipating the reference to the sanctuary (Ex 15:13):47

ָ‫נָחִיתָ ְב ַחסְּדְ ָך עַם־זּו ּגָָאלְּת‬ Thou have led by Thy grace people Thou have redeemed,
‫נֵ ַהלְּתָ ְב ָעּזְָך אֶל־ ְנוֵה קָדְ ׁשֶ ָך‬ Guided them by Thy strength to Thy holy abode.

It is notable that the two initial verbs in the clauses above, ָ‫ נָחִית‬nåḥî·ṯå and ָ‫ נֵ ַהלְּת‬nåhal·tå, are
actually exclusively poetic verbs and are later used as a literary echo in Psalms.48 Ps 23:2-3
uses both these verbs in parallel, ‫ יְנַ ֲה ֵלנִי‬yə·nahalē·nî and ‫ יַנְ ֵחנִי‬ya·nḥē·nî, extolling God’s pastoral

15:17 on a structure the God Himself has built precludes any application to earthly sanctuaries and points out
exclusively to the heavenly home (sanctuary). Psalm 78:54 of Asaph the Musician borrows from Ex 15:17 and
applies that ideal destination to the Holy Land (“He brought them to the border of his holy land, to this
mountainous land which his right hand acquired.” NET). Asaf’s use is only a partial, limited application, but not
the original intention of the Song of Moses.
45
The poetic image of God’s holy mountain and sanctuary home, were the redeemed reach their final
destination, which is sung by this first and most significant Israelite song, has apocalyptic overtones. In the book
of Revelation, God’s people lives finally in a heavenly sanctuary-city, after surviving the seven plagues that
remind the Egyptian exode (Rev 15-16; 21). It is in this context that the Song of Moses and the Lamb is
mentioned (Rev 15:3-4) and God’s heavenly tabernacle is shown immediately (Rev 15:5). See also Ninow (op.
cit. 148).
46
De Souza (idem 151) maintains that Ex 15:17 “may suggest a covert allusion to the heavenly temple,” but “the
primary referent of vss 13 and 17 is the Jerusalem temple.” Our conviction is that this Exodus song points clearly
and directly to the heavenly temple, since the celestial city-sanctuary is the only one of which it was believed
that God has built it (Ps 78:54; Hebrews 11:10, 13-16; 12:22). This concept cannot be an anticipation of the
earthly Jerusalem and temple. Nowhere is it written in the Bible that the earthly structure was God’s creation.
47
It is possible to count yet another instance, were this song refers to God’s sanctuary, namely in Ex 15:5, where
the phrase ‫( ּבַּק ֹדֶ ׁש‬parallel to ‫ ) ּבָאֵ לִם‬is interpreted and translated by De Souza (idem, pp 133-141), as “in the
sanctuary”, in spite of the common Bible translations that read, “in holiness”.
48
The two verbs are associated only in Ex 15:17 and in two Psalms (23:2-3; 31:4) of David.
 P a g e | 10

care in a manner that brings together the two poems.49 No wonder that Psalm 23 ends in the
same way as the Song of the Sea (23:6 NJB, “and I shall dwell in the house of Yahweh for
ever”). Was this a simple longing for bloody and smoky rituals? For singing and blowing
horns? It is an obvious metaphor of an eternal life in God’s presence. The Psalmist longed for
the heavenly ultimate reality. The very patriarchal title “God of heaven” (Gn 24:3,7),
indicates God’s heavenly residence. Certainly nobody could reach that celestial place, except
by some form of life beyond death.50

Various other allusions to a heavenly sanctuary have been discovered in the Pentateuch, to
confirm our conclusion about the nature of the sanctuary in Exodus 15.51 We will refer only to
the most explicit examples. Besides the case of Exodus 15, where the Hebrew poem refers to
the heavenly residence of God – pointing repeatedly to God as its architect and builder, the
next obvious reference is in Dt 26:15, where God’s sanctuary is called ‫ מְעֹון קָ דְ ׁשְָך‬mə‘ôn qodšəḵå
“Your holy abode”.52 Such an abode is explicitly located in heaven (‫ מִן־הַּׁשָמַ י ִם‬min-
haš·šåmáyim). The Deuteronomic reference is part of a ritual remembrance, which Israel had
to recite before Yahweh (Dt 26:13-15), and thus it was a permanent reminder of God’s
heavenly home.

Evidence from the book of Daniel

The heavenly residence of God is emphasized throughout the book of Daniel. Even the
Babylonian experts knew that the true dwelling of divinities is not among the mortals (Dan
2:11). “There is a God in heaven”, says Daniel (Dan 2:28). Therefore God is called ‫אֱ לָּה ׁשְמַ ּי ָא‬
’ĕlåh šəmayyå’ “the God of Heaven”(2:37), ‫ מָ ֵרא־ׁשְמַ ּי ָא‬mårē’ šəmayyå’ “the Lord of Heaven”
(5:23), or metonymically ‫ ׁשְ מַ ּי ָא‬šəmayyå’ “Heaven” (4:23/26), even by the Chaldean kings.
God’s spiritual agents come from heaven (Dan 4:13, 23). He is often called by the patriarchal
epithet ‫ ֶעלְיֹון‬cĕlyôn “the Most High”53 (the Upper One, the One who dwells high up), which in
49
Another link between the two songs are the pastoral overtones of the term ‫ נָוֶה‬of Ex 15:13, which is frequently
used to designate a shepherds’ shelter, pasturage (2S 7:8; 1Ch 17:7; Ps 23:2; Ez 34:14), enclosure (Ez 25:5) etc.
This term is further used in the Hebrew Bible for God’s sanctuary (2S 15:25; Jr 25:30; 31:23) and eschatological
Jerusalem (Is 33:20).
50
The Book of Daniel refers explicitly (12:1) and implicitly (7:21-22) to the resurrection. But the Hebrew belief
in returning to life is affirmed even earlier in Dt 32:39; 1Sam 2:6; Job 19:25-27; 1K 17:22; 2K 5:7; 8:1, 5; 13:21;
Is 26:19; 53:10; Ez 37:1-10 etc.
51
For example, De Souza (op cit., pp 83-122; 154-177) mentions the following episodes: God’s descending to
the tower of Babel (Gn 11:1-9), the Jacob’s ladder (Gn 28:10-22), the heavenly vision of the priests (Ex 24:9-
11), and the divine model of the tabernacle (Ex 25:9, 40; 32:1 – 34:34).
52
See also Jr 25:30; Zc 2:17; Ps 68:6; 2Ch 30:27, where this expression refers always to a heavenly home of
God.
53
Outside Genesis (14:18-19, 22), this patriarchal name of the Divinity is used only in poetry (Nu 24:16; Dt
32:8; 2S 22:14; Ps 7:18; 9:3; 18:14; 21:8; 46:5; 47:3; 50:14; 57:3; 73:11; 77:11; 78:17, 35, 56; 82:6; 83:19; 87:5;
91:1, 9; 92:2; 97:9; 107:11; Is 14:14; Lm 3:35, 38), as a royal title of God, the Heavenly Majesty.
 P a g e | 11

Aramaic was rendered ‫ ִע ָּלי ָא‬cillåyå’ or ‫ ֶעלְיֹונִין‬celyônîn.54 Such titles of a heavenly God reflect
the Hebrew theology of the true residence of Yahweh that is not an earthly palace.

The “most holy sanctuary” in Daniel 9

In Dan 9:24-25 the prophet was told that 70 weeks of years (or 10 jubilees) , equaling 490
years counted from a special permission “to restore and rebuild Jerusalem” would inaugurate
the Messianic era, with the anointing of a “most holy sanctuary”.
At the other end of the period of 70 weeks, Messianic events were expected:
to confine the crime,
to seal the sins,
to atone for guilt,
to bring in everlasting righteousness,
to seal visions and prophets,
to anoint the most holy. (Dan 9:24)
The expression ‫ ְולִמְׁש ֹ ַח ק ֹדֶ ׁש קָ דָ ׁשִ ים‬wə·li·mšôăḥ qóḏeš qåḏåšîm (Dan 9:20), “to anoint the most
holy” is of the greatest importance in understanding the concept of a heavenly sanctuary in the
book of Daniel. Some linguistic and contextual observations are necessary.
The verb ‫ משח‬mšḥ “to anoint” (or consecrate by pouring sacred oil thereon), which is
associated with the object ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש קָ דָ ׁשִ ים‬qóḏeš qåḏåšîm “most holy thing /place /person” belong to
the language of the sanctuary. While Bible translators are divided on the actual object to be
anointed,55 we may notice that the verbs ‫ מָׁשַח‬måšaḥ “anoint” and ‫ קִ ּדֵ ׁש‬qiddēš “sanctify” are
used together in the ritual of the sanctuary dedication.56
The anarthrous expression ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש קָ דָ שִים‬qóḏeš qåḏåšîm associated with the verb‫ מָׁשַ ח‬måšaḥ
“anoint” is used about the altar of sacrifices (Ex 29:37; 30:29; 40:10), and various ceremonial
elements and acts of the sanctuary were called ‫ק ֹדֶ ׁש קָ דָ שִ ים‬.57 References to the Most Holy Place
of the sanctuary are usually definite ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש הַּקֳ דָ ׁשִ ים‬qóḏeš haq∙qåḏåš∙îm,58 but there are important
54
Dan 3:26, 32 (4:2); 4:14/17, 21/24, 22/25, 29/32, 31/34; 5:18, 21; 7:18, 22, 25, 27. This is actually a plural
form, probably a honorific or emphatic pseudo-plural (cf. ‫)אלהים‬.
55
E.g. VUL (et unguatur sanctus sanctorum); TOB (pour oindre un Saint des Saints); NET (to anoint a most holy
place), NKJ (and to anoint the Most Holy).
56
“Moses… anointed the tabernacle and all that is in it, and sanctified them... he anointed it, and sanctified it,
including all its utensils, the altar, and all its utensils, he anointed them, and sanctified them; ... and shall anoint
it, to consecrate it. You shall also anoint the altar of burnt offering and all its utensils, and consecrate the altar,
so that the altar shall be most holy.” (Ex 40:9.11, Lv 8: 10, cf. 11QT 35:8-9 Emphasis supplied).
57
E.g. the frankincense (Ex 30:36), the annual atonement made on the incense altar (Ex 30:10); all kinds of sin
offerings, sacred bread and grain offerings destined to priests (Lv 2:3,10; 6:9-10,18-22; 7:1-6; 10:12,17;
14:13; 21:22; 24:9; Nu 18:9-10; Ez 42:13; 44:13; Ezra 2:63; Ne 7:65; 2Ch 31:14) various things consecrated to
God (Lv 27:28).
58
Cf. Ex 26:33-34; Nu 4:4, 19; 1K 6:16; 7:50; 8:6; Ez 41:4; 1Ch 6:34; 2Ch 3:8, 10; 2Ch 4:22; 5:7.
 P a g e | 12

exceptions. In the visions of Ezekiel, the vast area on the top of the mountain, dedicated to the
ideal temple, the new temple itself and the rooms destined to the priests are called ‫ק ֹדֶ ׁש קָ דָ שִים‬
qóḏeš qåḏåšîm (Ez 43:12; 45:1-3; 48:9-12).
The anointing of priests was included in the ceremony of the sanctuary anointing.59 The high
priest certainly owned the most sacred office. Only the anointed high priest could make
atonement at Yom Kippur (Lv 16:32). He was in charge with the holy oil (Nu 4:16). He
owned so sacred a position that he could not suspend it, not even to attend his parents’ funeral
(Lv 21:12). The priests were holy (‫ קְ דֹוׁשִ ים‬qǝḏôš∙îm and‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qóḏeš Lv 21:6-8; Nu 16:6-7).
The expression of 1Ch 23:13, ‫ ְלהַקְ ּדִ יׁשֹו ק ֹדֶ ׁש קָ דָ ׁשִ ים‬lǝ∙haqdîšô qóḏeš qåḏåšîm has been understood
by many as related to the most holy place of the sanctuary, or the most holy things. But it can
still be argued that it refers to Aaron himself,60 in the sense that Aaron and his descendants
had been “consecrated to be most holy”.
The Qumran manuscripts use the expression qóḏeš qåḏåšîm (most holy) in more diverse ways
compared to the Biblical usage. They speak about most holy spirit(s),61 the most holy
apartment or sanctuary,62 the most holy sanctuary above63 and the most holy priestly
community.64 An important contextual detail that has influenced the translation “to anoint the
Most Holy one” is the occurrence of the title ‫ מָׁשִ י ַח‬mašîaḥ “the Anointed One”, (Dan 9:25-26),
here appearing for the first time as a name, without the definite article (Dan 9:25-26), a title
usually given to kings and priests.
The most probable referent of the expression  ‫ ְולִמְׁש ֹ ַח ק ֹדֶ ׁש קָ דָ ׁשִ ים‬wǝ·li·mšōaḥ qóḏeš qåḏåš ∙îm “and
to annoint a most holy” of Dan 9:24 is therefore a new altar and sanctuary, a new priestly
order, or better a new sanctuary and priesthood system as a whole. The old tabernacle had
been anointed to be “holy”, and its altar even “most holy” (see fn 55), but now a new

59
Ex 28:41, 29:21.29-31, 30:30, 40:13, Lv 8:12.30, Nu 35:25.
60
See the Jewish modern translations CJB, JPS, TNK (“to be consecrated as most holy”), Schlachter 2000 (“daß
er als hochheilig geheiligt würde”), various English translations BBE, NAB, NAS, NAU, DBY; French NEG
(“pour être sanctifié comme très saint”), Italian NRV (“per essere consacrato come santissimo”), Romanian CNS
(“să fie sfinţit ca prea sfânt”). The Hebrew syntax is difficult and the meaning is ambiguous. Further research is
necessary to identify the meaning intended by the Biblical author.
61
E.g.‫( רוח קודש קודשים‬4Q403 f1ii:1; 4Q404 f5:1; 4Q405 f14_15i:2; f23ii:8; 11Q17 4:9); ‫רוחי קודש קודשים‬
(4Q286 f2:5; 4Q287 f2:7; 4Q403 f1i:44; 4Q405 f6:5; f19:2); ‫( רוחי קורב קודש קודשים‬4Q405 f14_15i:4); ‫קודש‬
‫( קודשים רוחות‬4Q403 f1ii:7f; 4Q405 f20ii_22:10).
62
E.g. ‫( מעון קודש קודשים‬1QS 8:8; 4Q258 6:2); ‫ ?( מעוז קודש קודשים לאהרון‬4Q260 2:17); ‫מקדש קודש קודשים בדבירי‬
‫( מלך‬4Q405 f14_15i:7); ‫( גבולי קודש קודשים‬4Q403 f1ii:27). See also 1QS 10:4; 4Q256 9:1; 19:2; 4Q260 2:4 ‫יום‬
‫ גדול לקודש קודשים‬.
63
E.g. 4Q403 f1i:41 ‫“ באלה יהללו כול יסודי קודש קודשים עמודי משא לזבול רום רומים וכול פנות מבניתו‬by these, all most
holy foundations, sustaining pillars of palace of Most High, and all His building’s towers will praise Him”;
4Q503 f15_16:2, 4-5 ‫“ קודש קודשים במרומים‬most holy place in heaven”.
64
4Q259 2:14 4 ;‫וסוד קדש קדשים לאהרון‬Q400 f1i:12 4 ;‫קודש קודשים כוהני‬Q400 f1ii:6 4 ;‫קודש קודשים קדושי‬Q401 f6:4-
5 1 ;‫ קודש ׂשרי‬... ‫קודש קודשים‬QS 9:6 1 ;‫קודש קודשים‬QSb 4:28 ‫)?( נזר לקודש קודשים‬.
 P a g e | 13

anointing is in view. The original anointing ceremony is described in the Bible as a unique
event in the history of Hebrew rituals. It was not repeated with every new structure of the
ceremonial system.65 This fact suggests that the anointing foreseen in Dan 9:24 must be the
inauguration of a completely new sanctuary corresponding to a new covenant.
In the same manner, one may understand why the heavenly being is seen in vision as clothed
in priestly linen (Dan 10:5; 12:6,7; cf. Rv 1:13-18) prepared to minister in the exalted and
celestial “most holy” sanctuary.66 It is also significant that the angel of prophecy (Gabriel)
brings to Daniel this Messianic revelation “at the time of the evening sacrifice,” at the hour of
prayer, which is the time when God answered Elijah’s prayer by fire (1Kings 18:29, 36; cf.
2K 3:20),67 and it has a blissful typological significance for the Christians (Mt 27:46, 51; Jn
1:36, 39; FA 3:1; 10:30).
While this prophecy in Dan 9:24-27 calls the temple in Jerusalem ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qódeš “holiness” or
“holy place” (verse 26), it foresees the anointing of a “most holy place” ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש קָ דָ ׁשִים‬qóḏeš
qåḏåšîm (Dan 9:20). The “holy one” is mentioned in the context of dispossession,68 when
Messiah the Ruler had to be “cut off” (Dan 9:26), while the “most holy one” is mentioned in a

65
The custom of consecrating places or objects as sanctuaries by anointing is quite old (Gn 31:13). There is
ample evidence that Moses anointed the tabernacle with its sacred objects: the ark (Ex 30:26), the basin
(Ex 40:11), and all accessories (Lv 8:10; Nu 7:1), and especially the altar, is repeatedly spoken as anointed (Nu
7:10, 84, 88). Interestingly, the preexilic and postexilic temples have not been anointed, they only have been
inaugurated by sacrifices or other ceremonies (‫ חנך‬ḥnk Ps 30:1; 1K 8:63; 2Ch 7:5; 15:8; Ezra 6:16-17; 1Mac
4:56; 2Mac 2:19; Jn 10:22), and thus consecrated or reconsecrated (‫ קדש‬qdš, 2Ch 7:16; 29:5); or after some
profanation, they have been cleansed (‫ טהר‬ṭhr, 2Ch 29:15; 2Mac 10:5). The ideal temple of Ezekiel did not have
to include anointing ceremonies. The consecration ceremonies had to be made by sacrifices (Ez 43:25-26). The
priesthood of Aaron and his sons has also been inaugurated by anointment, as part of the anointing ceremony of
the tabernacle (Ex 30:30; 40:13-15; Lv 8:10-12; Nu 35:25). It seems that their anointing was unique too, since
their descendants were to inherit the anointing by putting on the sacred garments that had been anointed (Ex
29:29; 40:15). The only exception mentioned is the anointing of priest Zadok as high priest, as a special case of
reelection together with Solomon (1Ch 29:22).
66
This theme of a new and celestial sanctuary and priesthood is developed in the Christian theology, especially
in the Epistle to the Hebrews (7-10), and in the Book of Revelation (1:13-18; 5:6-9; 7:15; 8:2-6; 9:13; 11:1-4, 19;
13:6; 14:15, 17-18; 15:5-8; 16:1,7; 20:9; 21:3, 15-16 etc.).
67
While the Hebrew espression does not explicitly refer to the “evening” sacrifice, the author shows previously
(1K 18:29) that it was in the afternoon.
68
We prefer the syntactic solution found by C. G. Ozanne (“Three textual problems in Daniel,” Journal of
Theological Studies, Ed. Chadwick, Sparks; Oxford, Clarendon Press. 16, 1965: 446-447). He shows that the
unnatural clause‫( וְאֵ ין לֹו‬Dan 9:26), whose meaning is usually disputed, must have its proper objects in the
following two words ‫“ ְו ָהעִיר ְוהַּק ֹדֶ ׁש‬and the city and the sanctuary”. “The Annointed, it seems, is viewed as the
natural possessor of the city and the sanctuary, and it is stated that he would die in possession of neither.
Whether this is more applicable to the Messiah or to Onias III the reader may judge.” (Ozanne seems ironical
here, since Onias III was only a high priest with no aspiration to rule over Jerusalem). Thus we should translate
“Messiah will be cut off, and neither the city, nor the sanctuary will belong to Him”, as YLT also suggests: “and
the city and the holy place are not his”. There is nothing to oppose this translation, except a misplaced (or
misread?) athnakh, as it is also the case in Dan 9:25 (“7 weeks [athnakh] and 62 weeks”), or in Ex 38:29 (“70
talents [athnakh] and 2400 shekels”) and Nu 1:46 (“603,000 [athnakh] and 550” = 603,550). Since Messiah was
expected as legitimate Ruler of City and Sanctuary, a King-Priest, even a divine figure (e.g. Ps 110, Is 9:6), it is
understandable that by applying to Him death penalty, He was denied any messianic claims.
 P a g e | 14

context of inauguration and making atonement for sins (verse 25). Both events are related to
the last of the “seventy weeks”.
Concluding, the expression ‫ קָ דָ ׁשִ ים לִמְׁש ֹ ַח ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬limšōaḥ qóḏeš qåḏåšîm “to annoint a most holy
sanctuary and priesthood” of Dan 9:24 refers to a different sanctuary and priesthood of a new
covenant, that had to be anointed or inaugurated by the Messianic events in years to come,
when atonement for guilt would be made, and the eternal righteousness have been brought.69
“The rebellion” was thus confined and sealed for the Day of Judgment .

The sanctuary of Dan 8:14 vindicated

We now come to an important question in relation to the exegesis of Dan 8:14, namely what
would happen to the sanctuary after the attacks of the little horn. The crucial verb ‫ְונִצְּדַ ק‬
wǝ·ni·ṣdaq in Dan 8:14 is a passive from ‫ צדק‬ṣdq “be right”, “make right”, “justify”.70 There
have been made commendable efforts to suggest an extended meaning of ‫ צדק‬ṣdq, as “be
clean” or “cleansed”,71 but seemingly with no conclusive results.72 This study prefers the
translation “vindicated”, in line with both old and recent Jewish translations that have tried to

69
In this context (cf. our translation at Da 9:24 at, the beginning of this section), “the rebellion” was thus
“confined” and “sealed” for the Day of Judgment.
70
This fact is established in all scholarly Hebrew lexicons: shall be put right, in a right condition; be justified, its
cause vindicated (BDBG); brought to its justice, justified (HALOT); be brought [back] to its rights, be
vindicated (Holladay); be brought to its right state (Clines). Martin Pröbstle (Truth and Terror: A Text-Oriented
Analysis of Daniel 8:9-14, Andrews University, PhD Dissertation, 2006: 403, fn 3, 412) made an impressive
analysis of this verb, noticing that the Niphal draws attention to the Hiphil forms (Ex 23:7; 1K 8:32; Is 50:8),
“where God in a legal context vindicates the righteous”. Pröbstle concludes that “the verb points to a divine
judgment which will justify the ‫”ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬, and he shows that in the intertestamental period ‫ צדק‬ṣdq functioned also
“as an eschatological and apocalyptic term.”
71
J. P. Justesen, “On the Meaning of ṢĀḎĀQ”, AUSS 2 (1964), 53-61; Walter E. Read, “Further Observations
on ṣādāq”, AUSS 4 (1966) 29-36; Niels-Erik Andreasen, “Translation of Niṣdaq/Katharisthēsetai in Daniel
8:14”, in Symposium on Daniel, ed. Frank Holbrook, Washington DC: BRI (1986) 475-96; Angel Manuel
Rodriguez, “Significance of the Cultic Language in Daniel 8:9-14,” in Symposium on Daniel, pp. 543-49; Elias
Brasil de Souza, The Heavenly Sanctuary / Temple Motif in the Hebrew Bible...,” Adventist Theological Society,
Dissertation Series (2005), 460-63; Martin Pröbstle (Truth and Terror, pp. 415-18).
72
Among the scholars who agree that the LXX translation of verb ‫ ְונִצְּדָ ק‬as καθαρισθήσεται is a a valid and
possible (though not certain) Maccabean interpretation, see S Horn [S.H.H.], in Justesen (op. cit. 60, fn 28); N E
Andreasen (“Translation...”, p. 488-494). R Davidson (“The Meaning of Niṣdaq...” 117) and Pröbstle (op. cit.
412.) admit that “Andreasen is right when he regards the context of the occurrence of Dan 8:14 as decisive in
determining the particular meaning of ‫”נִצְּדַ ק‬. Pröbstle (op. cit., pp 416 fn2, 418) notes: “The possibility that the
translator(s) of the OG and Theodotion chose to render ‫ ְונִצְּדַ ק‬in Dan 8:14 with καθαρισθήσεται in light of the
cleansing of the temple by the Maccabees (1Macc 4:36, 41) cannot be excluded...” “There is the possibility that
such a rendering of ‫ ְונִצְּדַ ק‬was historically influenced by the cleansing of the temple by the Maccabees.”
(Emphasis supplied). Gerhard Hasel (“The ‘Litle Horn’, pp. 449-458) wrote, “It is customary assumed, that this
[LXX καθαρισθήσεται] reflects the experience of the events of the (defilement and) rededication of the
Jerusalem temple in the time of Antiochus IV Epiphanes. This is possible, but not absolutely necessary...” Such a
possibility, according to Hasel, depends on the condition that the OG Daniel is proved a post-Antiochus
translation. But there is no question of the lateness of this OG translation of Daniel. It is commonly agreed that it
is post-Antiochus. K A Kitchen (“The Aramaic of Daniel,” London: Tyndale, 1965:43), for example, dated the
translation of Daniel after 100 BC.
 P a g e | 15

faithfully render the Hebrew verb ‫ ְונִצְּדַ ק‬wǝ·ni·ṣdaq in English: “and the holy ones shall be
exonerated”;73 “then shall the sanctuary be victorious”.74
However, the preference of other authors75 for the traditional translation of ‫ נִצְּדַ ק‬as “cleansed”
and its connection with the theology of Yom Kippur, as Lev 16:30 and Heb 9:23-24 seem to
imply, may be theologically justified, despite some contextual problems. The theological
result is actually the same, since the typology of The Day of Atonement in Leviticus 16 is
applied to the Judgment Day, according to both modern studies76 and traditional Jewish
commentaries.77
The eschatological justification through judgment, as suggested by the verb in Dan 8:14,
answers sufficiently the literary context. The image of the Sanctuary is important because it
vividly illustrates that apocalyptic history has its climax in judgment in the heavenly
sanctuary. The meaning of ‫ נִצְּדַ ק‬ni·ṣdaq “vindicated”, expresses Judgment, and it is justified by
the proximate and the larger literary contexts. Thus the meaning of the phrase ‫ְונִצְּדַ ק ק ֹדֶ ש‬
wǝ·ni·ṣdaq qóḏeš is best understood as corresponding to the phrase ‫ וְדִ ינָא יְהֵב לְקַ ּדִ ישֵי‬wǝ·ḏīn·å
yǝhēḇ lǝ·qaddīš·ê “and the judgment was given in favor of the saints …” of Dan 7:22,
emphasizing the theodicean concept of judgment-righteousness-justice-vindication-victory,
through a perfectly valid exegetical link to the preceding vision (Dan 7:10fg; cf. 12:12:1d).
The following table illustrates this parallel:

Dan 8: ‫‘ עַד מָתַ י‬aḏ måṯåy ‫ עַד‬... ‫‘ ְונִצְּדַ ק ק ֹדֶ ש‬aḏ… wǝ·ni·ṣdaq qóḏeš
13-14 “until when… ?” “until… then shall the Sanctuary be vindicated”
Dan “it made war with ‫וְדִ ינָא יְהֵב ְלקַּדִ ישֵי עַד ּדִ י‬...
7:22 the saints and ‘aḏ dî… wǝ·ḏīn·å yǝhēḇ lǝ·qaddīš·ê
overcame them” “until … and the judgment was given to (in favor
[until when ?] of) the saints”

73
Avroham Yoseif Rosenberg, Daniel, The Complete Jewish Bible with Rashi Commentary, www.chabad.org.
74
Jewish Publication Society of America (1917) www.mechon-mamre.org.
75
See O R L Crozier (“The Law of Moses”, in The Day-Star Extra, Feb 7, 1846); U Smith (Daniel and
Revelation, Review and Herald, Battle Creek, MI, 1912:166-178); J B Doukhan (Secrets of Daniel, Review and
Herald, Hagerstown, MD, 2000:126-134.
76
E. g. A M Rodriguez, The Sanctuary and its Cleansing, supplement to Adventist Review, Sept. 1994.
77
The Rabbinic tradition sees Yom Kippur as a day of the sealing of the destinies (final judgment). See
En.Wikipedia, “Yom Kippur”. Interestingly, Rashi in his classical commentary (see Miqrā’ōt Gǝdōlōt, Daniel,
http://he.wikisource.org ‫ מקראות גדולות‬for Daniel 8:14): ‫ "ונצדק קדש‬-- ‫"יכופר עון ישראל‬. Thus the Hebrew verb in
Da 8:14 is interpreted as an atonement for Israel’s guilt.
 P a g e | 16

There is also an interesting parallel of Dan 8:14 to Rv 6:9-11. , which has been noted also by
reputed scholars.78 The altar of the “daily”79 is here used in a sinful way, as the persecuting
power has shed at its base the “blood of the souls”80 of martyrs – possibly viewed as sanctuary
ministers. They have been slain because of the “truth” (which is embodied in the word of God
and the testimony of Jesus, Rev 6:9;12:11), as sure as the priestly “host” and “the truth” has
been “thrown to the ground and trodden underfoot” in Daniel 8. The cry “until when?” in Dan
8:13 is therefore a longing for “judgment and vindication” (cf. Rev 6:10), and heaven’s
answer is “white robes” (justification, exoneration) and assurance of a full vindication in due
time.
Dan 8:13-14 ‫‘ עַד מָתַ י‬aḏ måṯåy ‫ עַד‬... ‫‘ ְונִצְּדַ ק ק ֹדֶ ש‬aḏ… wǝ·ni·ṣdaq qóḏeš
“until when… ?” “until… then shall the Sanctuary be
vindicated”
Rv 6:10 ἕως πότε heōs pote οὐ κρίνεις καὶ ἐκδικεῖς
“until when…” ou krīn·eis kai ek·dik·ēis
“…Thou not judge and vindicate
yet?”81

It is beyond the purpose of this study to deal with the prophesized chronology related to the
vindication of the heavenly sanctuary. We only want to emphasize that the interpreting angel
set the fulfilling of the prophecy ‫ לְעֶת־קֵ ץ‬lǝ‘et qēṣ “at the time of the end” (cf. Da 8:17), or ‫לְמֹועֵד‬
‫קֵץ‬ lǝ‘mô‘ēd qēṣ “at the term of the end.” This end is not the conclusion of some epoch, since
it is expressed as an absolute, without any reference to some historical age, as it is confirmed
in Da 12:1-2, where the end brings the time of trouble and the resurrection, great apocalyptic
concepts.82 This observation helps us relate the eschatological emphasis of the Hebrew
expression to the whole theology of the divine judgment and vindication which is implied by
the expression ‫ ְונִצְּדַ ק ק ֹדֶ ש‬wǝ·ni·ṣdaq qóḏeš (“then the sanctuary shall be justified/vindicated”).
The climax of this vindication deals with the breaking of the wicked horn “without human
78
See, for example, R Bauckham (The Climax Prophecy, T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1993: 50-51) and J Doukhan
(Secrets of Revelation, Review and Herald, Hagerstown, MD, 2002: 65).
79
R Stefanović (Revelation of Jesus Christ, Andrews University Press, Berrien Springs MI, 2002: 32, 238): “The
altar in view here is most likely the altar of burnt offering rather than the altar of incence […] Using the
symbolism drawn from the Old Testament sacrificial ritual, John describes God's faithful people sacrificed as
martyrs with their lifeblood poured out as an offering to God.”
80
Cf. Gn 4:11; Dt 12:23; Pr 28:17; Jr 2:35.
81
For the use of both verbs (κρίνω “judge” and ἐκδικέω “revenge”, see also Jr 11:20; 28:36; Heb 10:30 (quoting
Dt 32:35a-36a > Ps 135:14 >> Ro 12:19); 1Mac 6:22 (NRS) and Rev 6:10 (“…How long will you fail to do
justice [ποιήσῃ κρίσιν] and to avenge [ἐκδικήσεις] our kindred?”
82
See G Pfandl (“Daniel’s ‘Time of the End’”in JATS, 7/1 Spring 1996: 141-58).
 P a g e | 17

hand” (Da 8:25), which is equated to the moment when the stone of Da 2:34 finally smites
“without human hand” and breaks into pieces the visionary image that represent human
kingdoms.83

The heavenly sanctuary, in visionary and actual reality

Beyond the immediate confines of the exegesis of Dan 8:14 we would like to venture briefly
into the realm of theology and look at the broader picture. On the basis of both Daniel and the
broader biblical context, it seems to us that the sanctuary above was not perceived as an
abstract idea, but as a special creation of God, His own residence made by His hands (Ex
15:17), “the city with firm foundations, whose architect and builder is God” (Heb 11:10, 16).
Some scholars may object to the idea of the reality and even materiality of the heavenly
sanctuary, in favor of a more spiritual and abstract correspondence (see fn 9). However, the
Biblical God, who created the first paradise and planted the tree of life as physical realities
(cf. Gen 2-3), not as mythical concepts, must manifest His presence and location in Heaven,
in a visible and tangible way.
We would not substitute the consistent Biblical concept of a splendid sanctuary in heaven, by
a Platonic ethereal abstraction, neither follow Philo’s concept of the cosmos-sanctuary,
interesting though such proposals may be. We hold dear the image of a God manifested in
physical expression before His saints in Heaven (c.f. Mt 18:10; Rv 22:4). However, we do
note that visions are not intended to convey us the true appearance of the heavenly things, but
to give us spiritual knowledge in familiar language. They are object lessons, not intended to
describe the physical reality in heaven.
God’s heavenly dwelling is called by various names in the Bible: tabernacle, mountain
(Ps 15:1), holy habitation (Dt 26:15), pastoral abode (Ex 15:13), Father’s home (Jn 14:1),
lofty residence, castle (Is 63:15), sanctuary (Ps 78:69), temple / royal palace (Ps 11:4), city
(Heb 11:10; 12:22). Even when it is shown and described in prophetic visions, there is no
consistent invariable and uniform picture of it.84
83
In this prophetic dream, there is also a moment that marks implicitly the time of the end, before the moment of
the smiting: the stone is cut from the mount “without human hand” (Dan 2:34, 45). The Aramaic term for this
“cutting” is ‫ הִתְ ְּגז ֶֶרת‬hit·gǝzéret from the root ‫ גזר‬gazar (cut; decide the destinity), suggesting a divine decision (cf.
Da 2;27; 4:14, 21; Est 2:1 LXX κατέκρινεν) before the actual punishment of the idol.

84
The best known visionary descriptions of the heavenly sanctuary occur in the book of Revelation:
1. In Rev 3:12, God’s temple is imagined as an eternal building, belonging to the New Jerusalem, as it
descends on this earth, and having metaphoric columns: the overcoming saints.
2. In Rev 4, the temple’s imagery is present, while the word “temple” is not used. The Throne hall is
described; the Throne is the equivalent of the Ark of the Covenant. Four cherubim are associated to
the Throne, and they look partly as the seraphim of Isaiah’s vision, partly as the living creatures of
 P a g e | 18

It is helpful to note that most of the elements of the sanctuary, if not all, as we have
shown, in the visions of the Revelation (see fn 78), are not intended to inform us about the
physical aspect of the heavenly sanctuary. In fact, visions seldom convey information about
the physical reality. They are supernaturally made to transmit spiritual-didactic lessons in
earthly familiar images. Thus to insist on the physical reality of the heavenly sanctuary
furniture, utensils and curtains is little helpful and often it is baffling, nearly turning the new
covenant’s sanctuary back to the old, imperfect system. In the earthly sanctuary, the
separating function of the inner veil was instructive, conveying to the sinner the idea of no
admittance (Ex 19:12; Lv 16:1-2). But in the new covenant sanctuary, there is no separating
veil between God and the heaven’s citizens (Heb 4:16; 10:19-22). In Revelation, the twenty
four elders are close related to the Throne, in the immediate presence of the Lamb and the
cherubim (cf. Rev 4:4; 19:4 etc.). There is no veil between them and their God.

Sanctuary and city, or sanctuary-city ?

The spiritual-didactic function of the sanctuary imagery in visions strongly suggests

that one must not cling to a literalistic interpretation of the elements. Among the various
images describing God’s heavenly sanctuary, two major symbols are used in a different
relationship in comparison with the earthly models: the heavenly city (New Jerusalem) and
the heavenly temple. While in the type the sanctuary was located in Jerusalem, in the antitype
celestial sanctuary and Jerusalem are mutually identifiable.

Ezekiel’s vision. Before the throne is the equivalent of the candlestick, with its seven candles of
fire, certainly not to illuminate God’s presence, but as a visionary symbol of the sevenfold Spirit of
God. There is no separation between the candlestick and the Throne. In capter 5, the slain Lamb is
seen in the closest association to the Throne, which is obviously not like in the typical sanctuary.
There is also incence and psalmic music in the immediate presence of the Throne.
3. In chapter 6:9-11 a scene of the outer altar is described, which is highly symbolical, and no one
should transform it in a physical description of a part of the heavenly sanctuary. See footnote 75.
4. In Rev 7:15, the heavenly temple is described as an eternal tabernacle where God will live with the
great multitude of the faithful that will survive the time of trouble.
5. In Rev 8:3-5, a heavenly sanctuary scene appears where a ministering angel brings incence together
with the prayers of the saints on the golden altar which is before the mercy seat of God. There is a
censer, burning coals and frankincence, prayers and seven ministering angels blowing the shofar.
Again no separating curtain or wall is mentioned.
6. In Rev 11:1-2, John sees God’s temple, the altar with its worshiping host – the inner court, court of
Israel – and the outer court, of the Gentiles who would tread it underfoot). The temple itself is not
described. In verse 19 and in 15:5, the temple is explicitly defined as heavenly, and this time only
the Ark of the Covenant is visible.
7. In Rev 14:15.17; 15:6; 16:1.17 the heavenly temple is the place where angels come from before
God’s presence. Their activity is associated with the golden altar (Ap 16:7), and the divine
Judgment is executed by forces that are sent from this temple, in the image of seven bowls full of
God’s wrath.
8. Finally, in Revelation 21 the New Jerusalem itself is the Sanctuary (Rev 21:3), even the most holy
place (21:16; cf. 1K 6:20). And John states that he did not see any temple in the City, since God and
Christ are the temple of her (Rev 21:22).
 P a g e | 19

The identification of the heavenly sanctuary with the heavenly city is not a theological
novelty. Long before theologians would note the parallel between the two sanctuaries, Jesus
used the expression, “My Father’s House”, to name both the temple in Jerusalem (Lk 2:49; Jn
2:16), and the future heavenly home of the redeemed (Jn 14:2). Describing the visionary
heavenly city, John declared (Rv 21:11) that he did not see any temple in it, since God and the
Lamb are its temple. But the city itself is the sanctuary, because it is called “God’s tabernacle
with His people,” (Rv 21:3, a covenantal language), God’s tent dwelling with the heavenly
beings (Rv 13:6).85
Moreover, the New Jerusalem is described in the form of a cube, like the most holy
apartment of the earthly sanctuary (Rv 21:16c; 1 Kings 6:20), its single equivalent in the
whole Bible. The twelve gem foundations are practically the same precious stones on the high
priest’s breastplate.86 This visionary language shows that what is called the heavenly city is
also God’s heavenly sanctuary.
The identification of the “sanctuary” with the NT heavenly city was made in 1846 by O R L
Crosier, 87 in a very insightful way. Joseph Bates, writing after having read Crosier’s article in

85
See also William Miller (Evidences From Sripture and History…., Troy, 1836; reprinted by TEACH Service,
Inc., New York, 2005, p. 34). “For there is not a word in the prophets or apostles, after Zerubbabel built the
second temple, that a third one would ever be built; except the one which cometh down from heaven [Rv 21:2-
3,9-10, the New Jerusalem], which is a spiritual one, and which is the mother of us all, (Jew and Gentile) and
which is free [Gal 4:26, the heavenly Jerusalem], and when that New Jerusalem is perfected [Rv 19:7-8; Is
49:18; 52:1], then shall we be cleansed and justified [Dan 8:14].” (Emphasis supplied). He further refers to
Phillippians 3:20-21
86
See, for example, R Stefanović (Revelation of Jesus Christ, p. 583), following G B Caird (The Revelation of St.
John the Divine, New York: Harper and Row, 1966: 274-275), J P M Sweet (Revelation. Philadelphia: Trinity
Press International, 1990: 306). Compare Rv 21:19-20 and Ex 28:17-20. Eight of the precious stones of Ex 28 in
Greek are identical to those in Rv 21 (σάρδιον, τοπάζιον, σμάραγδος, σάπφειρος, ἴασπις, ἀμέθυστος,
χρυσόλιθος, βηρύλλιον / βήρυλλος). Of the remaining, one stone has a synonym in Rv 21 (ἀχάτης = χαλκηδών),
and three only seem to have no equivalent in the two lists (ἄνθραξ, λιγύριον, ὀνύχιον // σαρδόνυξ, χρυσόπρασος,
ὑάκινθος). If one considers the loose translations, because of the linguistic difficulties in identifying the gems (in
both Hebrew and Greek), we should not emphasize such differences, since they are not important in this case.
They are practically the same. The gems of the two lists are identified first by the number 12, and second by their
association to the sanctuary. Their function may be somewhat different in the two lists, but the basic significance
is the same. The LXX of Ez 28:13 has also twelve gems related to God’s paradise and Holy Mountain.
87
«When our Saviour was at Jerusalem, and had pronounced its house desolate, the disciples came to Him to
show Him the buildings of the temple. Then He said: "There shall not be left here one stone upon another that
shall not be thrown down:" Matthew 24:1, 2. That temple was their Sanctuary; 1Chronicles 22:17-19; 28:9-13;
2Chronicles 29:5,21; 36:14,17. Such an announcement would tend to fill them with sadness and fear, as
foretelling the derangement, if not the total prostration of their entire religious system. But to comfort and teach
them, He says, "In My Father's house are many mansions;" John 14:1-3. Standing, as He was, on the dividing
line between the typical covenant and the anti-typical, and having just declared the house of the former no longer
valid, and foretold its destruction; how natural that He should point His disciples to the Sanctuary of the latter,
about which their affections and interests were to cluster as they had about that of the former. The Sanctuary of
the new covenant is connected with New Jerusalem, like the Sanctuary of the first covenant was with Old
Jerusalem. As that was the place where the priests of that covenant ministered, so this is in heaven, the place
where the Priest of the new covenant ministers. To these places, and these only, the New Testament applies the
name "Sanctuary", and it does appear that this should forever set the question at rest.» (Emphasis supplied). O
R L Crozier, “The Law of Moses”, in The Day-Star Extra, Feb 7, 1846: 37-44.
 P a g e | 20

the same year, discusses quite extensively the identity of the sanctuary, quoting a lot of
Biblical passages:
Well, says one, are you going to call this City the Sanctuary too? If you will allow the Bible
testimony, you will have to believe it is […] But allow me first to recommend to your
particular notice, O. R. L. Crosier’s article […]. Read it again. In my humble opinion it is
superior to any thing of the kind extant.
“Sanctuary was the first name the Lord gave the Tabernacle […] also the court with all its
hangings, and all the vessels of the ministry.” Exo. xxv: 8,9, and 38,21; Num. i:53. This,
then, was a dwelling place, and a true pattern of the heavenly, embracing within its
“jasper” walls “the Paradise of God,” with the “pure river of the water of life,” and the
“tree of life,” and the “Golden City in the midst,” all to come down from heaven and be
located in [the place of the] old Jerusalem. Za. 14th chapter. That’s too absurd to believe,
says one. Is it any more so, than to believe the Apostle John’s testimony? Does he not
show us that the tree of life is inside of the gates, in xxii: 14? (cf. Gen. ii:10,14; Ezek. 43).
[…]
(Quot. John xiv: 1, 3) I think I have now proved by unquestionable authority, that this
heavenly sanctuary is the very place with mansions which he has been preparing, and
according to his promise is now coming to receive his saints. […]
“Unto two thousand three hundred days then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” Dan. 8:14.
This, then, I understand, is the selfsame “heavenly Sanctuary, the New Jerusalem, the
Paradise of God.” […] This then is the capacious and glorious “golden City;” the “New
Jerusalem;” the “heavenly Sanctuary;” the “Bride of the Lamb’s Wife;” the “Mother of us
all;” the “Paradise of God;” the capital of our coming Lord’s EVERLASTING kingdom,
which is now about to descend from the “third heaven”….88
This complete identification of the city with the sanctuary, teaches us among other things a
major truth that in God’s heavenly realm, as well as in the future kingdom, there is no
distinction between polis (city) and hieron (sanctuary), between political (lay) and religious
affairs. Secular and sacred must sometimes be kept apart in this world, but they are not apart
in God’s heaven. The redeemed people of God are both priests and kings, even like their Lord
(Rv 20:6; Ps 110:4).
In the ancient Israelite state, there was a distinction between the Palace of Yahweh, (the
Sovereign king of the universe) and the rest of Jerusalem, including even the royal palace,
which was a different structure. Kings could not enter God’s palace (2Ch 26:16), and God did
not dwell in the kings’ palace. But God’s heavenly capital and God’s temple are one and the
same. Distinction between religious and political realm is very important in our world. But in

88
Joseph Bates, The Opening Heavens, May 8, 1846, pp. 15, 20-21, 28. http://sdapillars.org/joseph_bates_p.php.
Recently, Angel M. Rodriguez ("The Sanctuary", in Raoul Dederen, ed., Handbook of Seventh-day Adventist
Theology, Commentary Reference Series, vol. 12, Review and Herald PP, Hagerstown, MD, 2000, p. 389) came
close to the same idea: “At the end of the book we are informed that in the New Jerusalem there is no temple
(21:22); the whole city serves as God's tabernacle, the place where He dwells with His people (verse 3; cf.
7:15).” This interesting statement probably was not intended to mean that the heavenly sanctuary is identifiable
with the city, since Rodriguez wrote on the same page that “the heavenly sanctuary is a bipartite structure.”
Possibly Rodriguez was suggesting that in the end, after the complete eradication of sin from the universe, there
will be no need of a sanctuary bipartite structure (inside or outside of the city), but the city itself will be God’s
sanctuary.
 P a g e | 21

Heaven itself and in the ideal plan of God for the new world that He prepares, all things must
be one in Christ (Col 1:19-22).
While David wanted to build a house for Yahweh (a sanctuary), God sent him a prophetic
answer by the prophet Nathan, by wordplay (1Ch 17:4.10-14), showing that God promised
Himself to build a house (that is a permanent political status, a dynasty) to him. The
Messianic king is both temple and kingdom (Jn 2:19; Zc 6:13), according to this old
prophecy, therefore we are satisfied with the idea that God’s celestial sanctuary is both capital
city and sanctuary.
Such understanding, not too literalistic, but faithful to the prophetic message, gives the
interpreter a broader and longer perspective in the use of symbols in the books of Daniel and
Revelation, that are related to the theology of the sanctuary. It opens new possibilities of
theological research for deeper significance89 and avoids unnecessary contradictions.
While the nature and identity of the sanctuary in Daniel 8 are undobtedly real and celestial,
not abstract or earthly, its exact physical reality is probably not revealed, though the typologic
language, which is often used in the Bible, is still theologically instructive.

Summary and conclusions

We have discussed the subject of the sanctuary identity in Daniel 8:9-14 and reached the
following conclusions
 There is only one sanctuary in Daniel 8, the sanctuary of Yahweh, called
indiscriminately, by two synonyms: ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš (8:11) and ‫ ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬qóḏeš (8:13,14).
 The term ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn (verse 11) is best understood as a “place” or “dwelling” in
appositional construct phrase with the noun ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš “sanctuary.”
 Since the first occurrence of the terms ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn “dwelling” and ‫ מִקְ ּדָ ׁש‬miqdåš
“sanctuary” of Dan 8:11, is in Ex 15:17, with an obvious reference to God’s heavenly
home, and because the term ‫ מָכֹון‬måḵôn is usually applide to the same sanctuary above,
we concluded that the same identity must be held for the sanctuary of Daniel 8.
 We added evidence from the whole Hebrew Bible, that Israel had a permanent
theological consciousness of a heavenly sanctuary, and this evidence confirms our
exegesis based on the relationship between Daniel 8:11-14 and Exodus 15:13, 17.

89
For example, in view of the identity of the heavenly sanctuary as the city of God, the vindication of the
sanctuary may be also described as the preparation of the Bride (Rev 19:7-8), which is the New Jerusalem (Rev
21:2-3, 9-11), the Kingdom City, adorned with the names of its dwellers (cf. Is 49:16-18). Jesus’ parables of
wedding and kingdom maybe related to this theme (Mt 22:2-14; Lk 12:35-37; 19:12-27 etc.).
 P a g e | 22

 In the expression ‫ קָ דָ ׁשִ ים לִמְׁש ֹ ַח ק ֹדֶ ׁש‬limšōaḥ qóḏeš qåḏåšîm “to annoint a most holy
[sanctuary and priesthood]” of Dan 9:24 we identified the inauguration of the most
holy sanctuary of the new covenant, including its Priesthood, while the holy sanctuary
of the old covenant was doomed to war and desolation to the end. The most holy
sanctuary inaugurated in Daniel 9:24 confirms the reality of the heavenly sanctuary in
Daniel 8.
 We accepted the modern, etymological translation of the verb ‫ נִצְּדַ ק‬ni·ṣdaq
“vindicated”, “justified,” or “made justice for” in Dan 8:14, connecting it with the
judgment theme in Daniel (especially in chapter 7), as against the traditional,
interpretive translation “cleansed”.
 We have shown that the imagery of the prophetic visions is not intended to inform us
about the physical form of the heavenly sanctuary, so that we cannot know anything
precise about the actual appearance of this sanctuary.
 We have shown that the heavenly city (New Jerusalem) and the heavenly sanctuary are
the same celestial reality.
Some of our conclusions may not be final, but we hope that our suggestions will help
theologians have a better appreciation of the crucial eschatological import of the prophecy in
Daniel 8:14, and will open new trails in this rewarding field of research. The spiritual benefit
of this study is rich, and its main teaching is that the sanctuary is an expression of God’s
longing and covenant to live with His people in the same home, as a family (Ex 25:8; 2Cor
6:16; Heb 8:10; Rev 21:3), beyond any concern with sacred ritual and objects.